<?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>Tariff classification of imported chocolate flavour fails under cocoa-based heading; demand also barred by limitation</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99537</link>
    <description>Imported chocolate flavour was held not classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 18069090 because Heading 1806 and its Chapter Notes apply to food preparations containing cocoa, whereas the goods were natural flavouring substances intended to be added to food and not direct food consumption. On that basis, reclassification to the residuary cocoa-based entry was unsustainable. The Tribunal also found no suppression where the Bill of Entry disclosed full import details, so RMS clearance alone could not justify invocation of the extended limitation period. The demand was therefore time-barred and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 07:08:04 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 07:08:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=900319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tariff classification of imported chocolate flavour fails under cocoa-based heading; demand also barred by limitation</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99537</link>
      <description>Imported chocolate flavour was held not classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 18069090 because Heading 1806 and its Chapter Notes apply to food preparations containing cocoa, whereas the goods were natural flavouring substances intended to be added to food and not direct food consumption. On that basis, reclassification to the residuary cocoa-based entry was unsustainable. The Tribunal also found no suppression where the Bill of Entry disclosed full import details, so RMS clearance alone could not justify invocation of the extended limitation period. The demand was therefore time-barred and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 07:08:04 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99537</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>