Search Results for "Tariff classification"

139 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 139 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Union's Appeals in Advance Authorization IGST Exemption Case. The Court upholds the pre-import condition as a valid policy measure to prevent double benefit and cash blockage, reversing the Gujarat High Court's decision.

The case involves appeals by the Union of India against a Gujarat High Court judgment that set aside the mandatory 'pre-import condition' for claiming...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal, Classifies Car Matting as Carpet Under Chapter 57 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. HSN Explanatory Notes and Specific Description Principle Applied to Hold That Car Matting Is More Specifically Described as Carpet Than as Motor Vehicle Accessory.

The case involved two appeals by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III against a common decision of the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Classification of Plant Growth Promoters as Excisable Goods Under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Products Containing NPK as Essential Constituent Classified as 'Other Fertilizers' Under Note 6 Chapter 3105, Attracting 1% Duty.

The petitioners, Dharti Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and its director, challenged an order dated 8 March 2017 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Raymond Limited's Appeals in Central Excise Cenvat Credit Dispute. Cenvat Credit of AED (T&TA) on Inputs Can Be Utilized for Payment of BED on Final Products.

The appellant, Raymond Limited, is a company manufacturing blankets from woollen fibres. The blankets attract only Basic Excise Duty (BED) and not Add...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Central Excise Case on Interest Liability for Provisional Assessment. Section 11DD of Central Excise Act, 1944 not applicable to differential duty determined on finalization of provisional assessment under Rule 9B of Central Excise Rules, 1944.

The appellant, Godrej Industries Limited, was engaged in the manufacture of Liquid Hair Dye during the period from September 1982 to March 1985. The d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State's Revision Petitions in Asian Paints VAT Case — Input Tax Credit on Capital Goods Allowed Despite Non-Use in Manufacturing. Section 11(4) of KVAT Act, 2003 does not restrict ITC on capital goods used for generation of electricity for own consumption.

The State of Karnataka filed multiple revision petitions under Section 65(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT Act) read with Section 9...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Central Excise Case: Commissioner's Decision on Nil Duty Binding on Assessing Officer. Duty on DTA Clearances of Fresh Mushrooms by 100% EOU Held Nil Following Commissioner's Order Under Section 3(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944.

The appellant, ECO Valley Farms & Foods Limited, a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) engaged in cultivation, manufacture, and export of fresh/processed ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Customs Appeal Without Pre-deposit in Classification Dispute — Tribunal's Discretion Must Be Exercised Consistently. Pre-deposit direction set aside as Tribunal failed to follow its own earlier order on identical issue under Section 129E of Customs Act, 1962.

The appellant, Videocon Industries Ltd., a manufacturer of LCD TVs, had been regularly importing Liquid Crystal Device – Thin Film Transistor Module...