Search Results for "tariff classification"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Death Not Arising O...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to Arbitral Award in Commerci...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Attachment of Property in NSEL Scam C...
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Customs Classification Dispute — Bulk Pet F...

Search Results for "tariff classification"

118 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 118 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Review Petition Filed by Customs Department in Customs Act Case — DRI Officers Held as Proper Officers. The Court overruled earlier decisions and upheld Section 28(11) of the Customs Act, 1962 as constitutionally valid, restoring the Department's power to issue show cause notices.

13 Dec 2024

The Supreme Court, in a batch of petitions led by Review Petition No. 400 of 2021, considered the correctness of its earlier judgment in M/s Canon Ind...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Duty Exemption Case for Dredger Components. Imported goods like pumping units and pipes are held as integral parts of a cutter suction dredger, entitling them to nil duty under Notification No. 21/2002-CUS, based on functionality and precedent in Boskalis Dredging India Pvt. Ltd.

1 Mar 2023

The dispute involved an appellant who imported a cutter suction dredger along with accessories such as pumping units, pipes, air compressors, and othe...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Service Tax Classification Dispute. CESTAT's finding that activity was classifiable under Works Contract Service rather than Erection Commissioning and Installation Service upheld.

14 Dec 2022

The Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Thane, filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Finance Act, 1994 agains...

High Court

High Court Allows Appeal in Entry Tax Case — Lubricants Not 'Petroleum Products' Under Karnataka Entry Tax Act. Synthetic and petroleum-based lubricants imported under Customs Tariff Chapters 34 and 37 are not covered by the definition of 'petroleum products' in Section 2(6) of the Karnataka Entry Tax Act, 1979, and thus not liable to entry tax.

16 Dec 2020

The appellant, M/s. Kluber Lubrication (India) Pvt Ltd, a private limited company registered as a dealer under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Considers Whether Refund Claim Under Customs Act Requires Appeal Against Assessment Order. Self-Assessment Under Section 17 and Amendment to Section 27 by Finance Act 2011 Examined.

18 Sep 2019

The Supreme Court heard a batch of appeals filed by assessees and the Union of India against judgments of various High Courts and the Customs, Excise ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant/buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise dut...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Customs Confiscation Case — Goods Not Liable for Confiscation Under Section 111(d) or 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962. Supplier's Innocent Involvement and Lack of Misdeclaration by Respondent Lead to Dismissal.

19 Apr 2005

The case involves two appeals filed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Goa, under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, against a common...

6 7 8 9 10

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)