https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782713 CESTAT allowed the importer's appeal, holding that the imported oval gold pendants with hooks are classifiable as jewellery under CTH 7113 1910 as declared, and not under CTH 7108 1300 as held by the lower authority. Relying on HC precedent, CESTAT held that DGFT Notifications dated 24.08.2019 and 18.12.2019, issued subsequent to the dates of import, could not retrospectively restrict goods that were freely importable at the time of import. Further, Notification No. 22/2021 expanding the scope of the main provision was held to be only prospective. As the demand itself was unsustainable, confiscation and penalties were set aside and the Commissioner's order was quashed. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 16:22:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782713 CESTAT allowed the importer's appeal, holding that the imported oval gold pendants with hooks are classifiable as jewellery under CTH 7113 1910 as declared, and not under CTH 7108 1300 as held by the lower authority. Relying on HC precedent, CESTAT held that DGFT Notifications dated 24.08.2019 and 18.12.2019, issued subsequent to the dates of import, could not retrospectively restrict goods that were freely importable at the time of import. Further, Notification No. 22/2021 expanding the scope of the main provision was held to be only prospective. As the demand itself was unsustainable, confiscation and penalties were set aside and the Commissioner's order was quashed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782713