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>Court sets aside circular, orders reassessment of duty for fortified tea under Customs Tariff Act</h1> <h3>HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD. Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS</h3> The court allowed the writ application, setting aside the impugned circular and order-in-original. It directed the respondent authorities to assess the ... Whether tea fortified with vitamins is liable to tariff under Chapter 21 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 or under Chapter 9 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 – Held that:- power tea fortified with vitamins, produced by the petitioner company, was assessed to duty under Chapter Heading 2101. However, the Appellate Commissioner on appeal passed an order holding that power tea with vitamins manufactured was not classifiable under sub-heading 2101.20, but was classifiable under Chapter 0902 - The demand of Central Excise was dropped. The aforesaid decision has assumed finality, there being no further appeal therefrom. A different stand cannot now be taken. - Decided in favor of assessee. Since no appeal was preferred against the order passed by the Tribunal in one case and the same has become final, the Department is not entitled to raise the same point in other cases. Decisions in Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, [2006 (8) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] and J.K. Synthetics Ltd. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., [1981 (4) TMI 96 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI] followed. Decision in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Goa v. Phil Corporation Limited [2008 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] distinguished. Issues Involved:1. Classification of tea fortified with vitamins under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.2. Maintainability of the writ petition.3. Definition and scope of 'manufacture' under excise law.4. Interpretation of taxing statutes.5. Binding nature of previous judicial decisions on the department.Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of Tea Fortified with Vitamins:The primary issue was whether tea fortified with vitamins should be classified under Chapter 21 or Chapter 9 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The petitioners argued that fortified tea remains tea and should fall under Chapter 9, which includes all forms of tea and exempts it from duty. In contrast, the impugned circular from the Central Board of Excise and Customs classified it under Chapter 21, specifically under Tariff Item 2101.20, which includes preparations with a basis of tea.The court observed that Chapter 21 deals with miscellaneous edible preparations and expressly excludes flavored tea. It was noted that the items under Chapter 21 involve a manufacturing process that changes the product's nature, unlike fortification with vitamins, which does not transform tea into a new product. Therefore, tea fortified with vitamins should be classified under Chapter 9.2. Maintainability of the Writ Petition:The respondents argued that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the existence of an alternative remedy of appeal against an order of assessment. However, the court held that the Commissioner (Appeals) could not decide on the legality of the circular issued by the Board. Since the circular was under challenge, the matter had to be decided by the court. The petitioners also undertook to withdraw any pending appeals, making the writ petition maintainable.3. Definition and Scope of 'Manufacture':The court examined the definition of 'manufacture' under excise law, referencing several Supreme Court judgments. It was established that 'manufacture' implies bringing a new substance into existence, not merely producing some change in a substance. The court concluded that spraying vitamins on tea does not constitute 'manufacture' as it does not transform tea into a new product with a distinct name, character, or use. Therefore, fortified tea remains tea and does not fall under the ambit of Chapter 21.4. Interpretation of Taxing Statutes:The court emphasized that taxing statutes must be strictly construed as understood in popular or commercial parlance, not technically. In case of ambiguity, the interpretation favoring the assessee should be preferred. Given that tea fortified with vitamins remains tea, it should be classified under Chapter 9, which includes all forms of tea.5. Binding Nature of Previous Judicial Decisions:The court noted that previous decisions of the CESTAT and other judicial authorities, which had not been appealed, were binding on the department. The department could not take a different stand in this case. The court cited several judgments to reinforce that the authorities could not depart from their earlier stand if the facts and circumstances were the same.The court also highlighted that the principles laid down in previous judgments, even if not pertaining to the same product, were applicable. The product must undergo a significant change to be considered 'manufactured.'Conclusion:The writ application was allowed, and the impugned circular dated 15th July 2010, and the order-in-original dated 21st January 2010, were set aside. The court directed the respondent authorities to assess the duty payable in light of the observations made. The judgment reinforced that tea fortified with vitamins should be classified under Chapter 9 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and not under Chapter 21.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found