Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2024 (2) TMI 740

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l Commissioner of Customs, Mundra Customs House, Mundra (hereinafter referred to as the adjudicating authority). Same was decided by Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 16.09.2021. Aggrieved by this order, appellant has filed the present appeal. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the appellant had filed Bills of Entry for clearance of imported goods declared as Cocoa Powder. The goods were shipped from Malaysia and the importer had filed Bill of Entry availing concessional rate of Customs Duty benefit, on the basis of Country of Origin Certificate prescribed under Notification No.46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011, as amended. The goods were cleared on the basis of self assessed Bill of Entry filed by the appellant. Benefit of Notifica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tructure due to data privacy. 3. Accordingly a show cause notice was issued to the appellant seeking to deny the benefit of Exemption Notification and imposing penalty under Section 112 and 114A and 114AA by rejecting the concessional certificate. The same were imposed and upheld by the lower authorities by rejecting the certificate of origin as cost structure was stated to be not provided by M/s JB Cocoa and M/s Guan Chong Cocoa, the other supplier. This despite the concerned agency i.e. MITTI of Malaysia verifying the genuineness of the certificate through internal investigation. The country of origin as Malaysia was therefore considered as wrongly mentioned. Since to the department DRI investigation revealed that value addition as of ....