<?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>Schedule-B coverage and customs broker penalty fail where Ergotamine preparation was outside the notified entry.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100083</link>
    <description>A customs broker penalty dispute turned on whether a medicine exported as MIGRAN, containing Ergotamine, fell within Schedule-B and required a Narcotic Commissioner NOC. The Tribunal held that Schedule-B covered only Ergotamine and its salts, not preparations containing it, so the NOC-based penalty could not stand. It also found that knowledge of undeclared additional medicine could not fairly be attributed to the broker on the facts, given the exporter&#039;s stated ignorance and the technical uncertainty surrounding the product. In any event, it held that the residuary penalty under Section 117 was unavailable where the CBLR contained a specific penalty provision, and it set aside the penalty order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 08:14:32 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 08:14:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Schedule-B coverage and customs broker penalty fail where Ergotamine preparation was outside the notified entry.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100083</link>
      <description>A customs broker penalty dispute turned on whether a medicine exported as MIGRAN, containing Ergotamine, fell within Schedule-B and required a Narcotic Commissioner NOC. The Tribunal held that Schedule-B covered only Ergotamine and its salts, not preparations containing it, so the NOC-based penalty could not stand. It also found that knowledge of undeclared additional medicine could not fairly be attributed to the broker on the facts, given the exporter&#039;s stated ignorance and the technical uncertainty surrounding the product. In any event, it held that the residuary penalty under Section 117 was unavailable where the CBLR contained a specific penalty provision, and it set aside the penalty order.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 08:14:32 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>