<?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>2025 (12) TMI 389 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782849</link>
    <description>CESTAT (AT Ahmedabad) held that classification of imported cold rolled stainless steel strips requires detailed examination of the precise processes undertaken, grade and composition, with scope to adopt a tariff sub-heading different from those claimed by either side. As both factual and legal issues are complex and the SCNs were based on data furnished by the importer, the Tribunal declined invocation of the extended period of limitation. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to: (i) determine the correct classification, (ii) assess whether invoice-Certificate of Origin discrepancies are procedural or substantive for concessional duty eligibility, (iii) recompute differential duty and interest without extended period, and (iv) re-evaluate penalties on directors and others.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2025 17:32:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=869359" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 389 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782849</link>
      <description>CESTAT (AT Ahmedabad) held that classification of imported cold rolled stainless steel strips requires detailed examination of the precise processes undertaken, grade and composition, with scope to adopt a tariff sub-heading different from those claimed by either side. As both factual and legal issues are complex and the SCNs were based on data furnished by the importer, the Tribunal declined invocation of the extended period of limitation. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to: (i) determine the correct classification, (ii) assess whether invoice-Certificate of Origin discrepancies are procedural or substantive for concessional duty eligibility, (iii) recompute differential duty and interest without extended period, and (iv) re-evaluate penalties on directors and others.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>