Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

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 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Customs Tribunal: Die sets not interchangeable tools under Heading 82.05. Goods reclassified under Heading 82.45/48.</h1> <h3>PUREWALL & ASSOCIATES LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY</h3> The Tribunal ruled that the Press Tools, identified as die sets, were not interchangeable tools under Heading 82.05 of the Customs Tariff Act. Instead, ... - Issues Involved:Classification of Press Tools as die sets under Customs Tariff Act - Heading No. 82.05 vs. Heading No. 84.45/48.Detailed Analysis:1. Issue of Classification: The central question in this case was whether Press Tools, identified as die sets, should be classified under Heading No. 82.05 of the Customs Tariff Act, as asserted by the lower authorities, or under Heading No. 84.45/48, as contended by the appellants. The die sets in question were intended for use in power presses installed in the appellants' factory for manufacturing watch parts. The crucial aspect for determination was whether these die sets could be considered interchangeable tools for the purposes of Heading 82.05.2. Appellants' Arguments: The appellants presented two key arguments. Firstly, they argued that the die sets did not fall under Chapter 82 of the C.C.C.N. as it pertained only to hand tools, and the die sets were not hand-operated. Secondly, they claimed that the die sets were not interchangeable tools, supported by a certificate from an engineering firm stating the same. They emphasized that interchangeability should be assessed based on the tool itself, not the machine to which it is attached.3. Department's Position: The department contended that Heading 82.05 encompassed interchangeable tools for machine tools, not limited to hand tools. They argued that when one die set wore out, it could be replaced by another of the same type, thus meeting the criteria of interchangeability. The department also challenged the validity of the certificate provided by the appellants, citing discrepancies in the examination process and import documentation.4. Tribunal's Decision: After careful consideration, the Tribunal concurred with the department that Heading 82.05 included interchangeable tools for machine tools. However, they found merit in the appellants' argument regarding the lack of interchangeability of the die sets. The Tribunal emphasized that interchangeability should be assessed based on the tool's ability to replace another product to fulfill requirements, as per the ISO Guide definition. Since each die set could only manufacture one specific watch part and could not be substituted by another tool, they concluded that the die sets did not meet the criteria of interchangeable tools under Heading 82.05.5. Relevant Considerations: The Tribunal dismissed the department's analogy with Item 51A of the Central Excise Tariff, deeming it irrelevant to the customs duty issue at hand. They also clarified that the drawings and plans, though delayed in importation, were not crucial as long as the goods themselves were available for inspection without dispute over their function.6. Final Judgment: Based on their analysis, the Tribunal ruled that the die sets were not interchangeable tools and, therefore, did not fall under Heading 82.05. Instead, they classified the goods under Heading 82.45/48, covering parts and accessories suitable for use primarily with machine tools for metalworking. Consequently, the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellants, granting them consequential relief.This detailed analysis encapsulates the classification dispute over Press Tools as die sets under the Customs Tariff Act, highlighting the contrasting arguments presented by the appellants and the department, leading to the Tribunal's final decision based on the interpretation of interchangeability criteria under the relevant tariff headings.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found