https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465072 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal of the customs broker and set aside the penalty imposed under s.112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2013. While the earlier order had upheld reclassification of the imported surgical microscope under CTI 90118000 with consequential duty and interest, penalty on the importer under s.114A had already been vacated. In the present proceedings, the Tribunal held that the broker had classified the goods on the importer's instructions, that classification is the responsibility of the proper officer, and that due diligence under Regulation 11(e) had not been breached. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 11:59:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465072 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal of the customs broker and set aside the penalty imposed under s.112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2013. While the earlier order had upheld reclassification of the imported surgical microscope under CTI 90118000 with consequential duty and interest, penalty on the importer under s.114A had already been vacated. In the present proceedings, the Tribunal held that the broker had classified the goods on the importer's instructions, that classification is the responsibility of the proper officer, and that due diligence under Regulation 11(e) had not been breached. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 19 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465072