https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793270 Mineral hydrocarbon oil was held correctly classifiable under heading 27101990, because the evidence did not establish the 90% distillation requirement at 210 C needed for sub-heading 2710 12, and the contemporaneous Kolkata and IOCL test reports were preferred over a later Delhi report for a volatile product. Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were also held unsustainable, because the objection under the Petroleum Rules, 2002 related only to a regularisable procedural lapse rather than a substantive import prohibition; once the licensing position was regularised, Section 111(d) confiscation and the consequential penalty under Section 112(a)(i) could not survive. en-us Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jun 2026 13:21:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793270 Mineral hydrocarbon oil was held correctly classifiable under heading 27101990, because the evidence did not establish the 90% distillation requirement at 210 C needed for sub-heading 2710 12, and the contemporaneous Kolkata and IOCL test reports were preferred over a later Delhi report for a volatile product. Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were also held unsustainable, because the objection under the Petroleum Rules, 2002 related only to a regularisable procedural lapse rather than a substantive import prohibition; once the licensing position was regularised, Section 111(d) confiscation and the consequential penalty under Section 112(a)(i) could not survive. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793270