https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789378 A duty demand under the IGCR framework cannot be sustained merely on an allegation that imported quantities exceeded the declaration made for concessional-rate clearance. The scheme requires the importer to furnish estimated quantity and value, execute the prescribed bond, and obtain clearance on that basis; recovery under Rule 8 is tied to non-use for the declared manufacturing purpose. Where the record does not show which customs officer accepted or cleared quantities beyond the declaration, or how the alleged irregular clearance occurred, customs demand, interest and penalty are unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded. en-us Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2026 08:56:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789378 A duty demand under the IGCR framework cannot be sustained merely on an allegation that imported quantities exceeded the declaration made for concessional-rate clearance. The scheme requires the importer to furnish estimated quantity and value, execute the prescribed bond, and obtain clearance on that basis; recovery under Rule 8 is tied to non-use for the declared manufacturing purpose. Where the record does not show which customs officer accepted or cleared quantities beyond the declaration, or how the alleged irregular clearance occurred, customs demand, interest and penalty are unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789378