<?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>2026 (1) TMI 532 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784776</link>
    <description>Processing and washing of run-of-mine manganese ore to remove foreign matter and improve suitability for metallurgical use/economic transport was held to constitute &quot;conversion&quot; under Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 26 (w.e.f. 01.03.2011), resulting in deemed manufacture and emergence of &quot;ore concentrates&quot;; consequently, the imported goods were treated as concentrates and were not entitled to CVD exemption under S. No. 4 of Notification No. 04/2006-CE, and contrary departmental circular guidance was disregarded as inconsistent with the deeming provision and fact pattern. Interest on differential duty arising upon finalization of provisional assessments was held payable, applying the statutory scheme (including CTA s. 3(8)) and SC authority on retrospective effect of final assessment; appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:31:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=877585" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 532 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784776</link>
      <description>Processing and washing of run-of-mine manganese ore to remove foreign matter and improve suitability for metallurgical use/economic transport was held to constitute &quot;conversion&quot; under Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 26 (w.e.f. 01.03.2011), resulting in deemed manufacture and emergence of &quot;ore concentrates&quot;; consequently, the imported goods were treated as concentrates and were not entitled to CVD exemption under S. No. 4 of Notification No. 04/2006-CE, and contrary departmental circular guidance was disregarded as inconsistent with the deeming provision and fact pattern. Interest on differential duty arising upon finalization of provisional assessments was held payable, applying the statutory scheme (including CTA s. 3(8)) and SC authority on retrospective effect of final assessment; appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>