<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>CNG kits are packaged goods under Section 4A SWM Rules; RSP nondisclosure upheld, duty recovery ordered; Sec 112 liability sustained</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93357</link>
    <description>CESTAT affirmed the adjudication that imported CNG kits/components qualified as packaged goods within the scope of Section 4A read with the SWM Act and Rules, requiring declaration of Retail Sale Price (RSP); consequent customs duty shortfall based on non-declaration of RSP was upheld and recovery directed for the normal assessment period. The penalty under Section 114A was quashed. Personal liability under Section 112 was sustained against the director for failure to declare RSP, but personal penalties against the officer-in-charge and the CHA were set aside. The impugned order was otherwise affirmed and the appeal disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CNG kits are packaged goods under Section 4A SWM Rules; RSP nondisclosure upheld, duty recovery ordered; Sec 112 liability sustained</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93357</link>
      <description>CESTAT affirmed the adjudication that imported CNG kits/components qualified as packaged goods within the scope of Section 4A read with the SWM Act and Rules, requiring declaration of Retail Sale Price (RSP); consequent customs duty shortfall based on non-declaration of RSP was upheld and recovery directed for the normal assessment period. The penalty under Section 114A was quashed. Personal liability under Section 112 was sustained against the director for failure to declare RSP, but personal penalties against the officer-in-charge and the CHA were set aside. The impugned order was otherwise affirmed and the appeal disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 08:27:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93357</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>