Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.17 seconds)

Ceramic Tableware Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner, Customs ... on 29 February, 2024

10. In the present case the appellant had stated that all through out they have been declaring the classification of the goods under CTH 28 and this was the solitary instance when their staff had classified the goods under CTH 25 on the advice of the supplier that there was change in the composition of the product and would therefore merit classification under Tariff Heading 25 of the Custom Tariff Act. I also take note of the fact that soon after detection on 26.11.2020, the appellant paid the differential duty along with interest and penalty on 4.12.2020 without any protest. From the nature of amendment sought by the appellant in Bills of Entry, the same is liable to be allowed since only a paper declaration was sought for amending the Customs Tariff Heading from 25 to 28. The observations made by the Delhi High Court in CC Vs. M.D. Overseas - 2023 SCC Online Del. 6056 are relevant in the present context on the applicability of Section 149 of the Act, the same reads as :
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1