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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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>Classification of Maize Starch Powder Upheld as Non-Modified Starch</h1> The court upheld the classification of Maize Starch Powder (MSP) under Chapter heading 1103.00 as non-modified starch, rejecting the Revenue's claim for ... Classification of modified starch of Chapter 3505 and native starch as of Chapter 11 can only be made after proper chemical testing - Indian Standard of modified starches and native starch are available – Held that:- When the sample of the MSP manufactured by the assesse was not tested properly by keeping the Indian standards in mind, then there does not seem to be any irregularity on the part of adjudicating authority to get samples drawn and tested as per parameters given in Indian Standard, when such an exercise was done in the presence of officers of Central Excise - During subsequent testing of starch samples manufactured by the respondent and the cross examination of Dr. G.P. Sharma, the Chemical Examiner, it has clearly come out that the MSP starches manufactured by the assessee belong to category of native starches of CETH 1103.00 and not modified starches of 3505.90. Time-barred appeal - The adjudicatory authority has also dropped proceedings on the ground that extended period cannot be invoked in the case - Proceedings regarding demand of duty being time-barred, has not be questioned by the Revenue – Decided against Revenue. Issues:Classification of Maize Starch Powder (MSP) - Chapter heading 1103.00 vs. CETH 3505.90 as Modified StarchIssue 1: Classification of Maize Starch Powder (MSP)The appeals were filed by the Revenue challenging the classification of Maize Starch Powder (MSP) manufactured by the respondent under Chapter heading 1103.00 as non-modified Starch, while the show cause notice claimed classification under CETH 3505.90 as Modified Starch. The Revenue contended that the manufacturing process, end use, and chemical analysis indicated that the product should be classified as modified starch. Statements from company officials and chemical reports were presented to support this argument.Issue 2: Reliance on Test ReportsThe Revenue argued that the classification should be based on the test report dated 03.11.2003 by the Chemical Examiner, which concluded that the MSP could be considered as processed/modified starch. They emphasized that test reports from samples drawn during adjudication should be relied upon, not those from later stages. However, the respondent highlighted cross-examinations and chemical tests that revealed the MSP as native starch, not modified starch.Issue 3: Legal Standards for ClassificationThe judgment referred to the distinction between modified starches and unmodified starches based on specific properties such as solution clarity, gel stability, and water binding capacity. Proper chemical testing, as per Indian standards, is crucial for accurate classification. It was noted that the MSP samples manufactured by the respondent were found to belong to the category of native starches under Chapter heading 1103.00, not modified starches under 3505.90.Issue 4: Time-Barred DemandThe adjudicating authority dropped proceedings citing that the extended period could not be invoked in this case. The advocate for the respondent argued that the demand of duty being time-barred was not questioned by the Revenue in the appeal. The judgment upheld the decision of the adjudicating authority, stating that the order was legal, correct, and justified, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal.This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the classification of Maize Starch Powder, reliance on test reports, legal standards for classification, and the time-barred nature of the demand, providing a comprehensive overview of the issues involved in the case.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found