https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792041 Imported arecanut was held classifiable as roasted arecanut under CTH 20081920, because an un-stayed advance ruling in the importer's own case and a later court-directed laboratory report showing 2.09% moisture both supported that classification. The contrary reclassification to raw arecanut under CTH 08028020 was rejected. Once the goods were accepted as correctly declared and classified, the alleged misdeclaration-based confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the related penalties under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) could not survive. The confiscation and penalties were therefore set aside. en-us Wed, 20 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2026 16:17:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792041 Imported arecanut was held classifiable as roasted arecanut under CTH 20081920, because an un-stayed advance ruling in the importer's own case and a later court-directed laboratory report showing 2.09% moisture both supported that classification. The contrary reclassification to raw arecanut under CTH 08028020 was rejected. Once the goods were accepted as correctly declared and classified, the alleged misdeclaration-based confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the related penalties under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) could not survive. The confiscation and penalties were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 20 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792041