Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the product "Shaheen Masheri" was classifiable under Chapter Heading 3306.10 as tooth powder or under Chapter Heading 2404.99 as other manufactured tobacco, and whether the demand and penalties could be sustained.
Analysis: The product was the very same commodity whose classification had already been examined in connected proceedings. The classification dispute had been resolved by applying the common parlance test and the earlier view classifying the product under Chapter Heading 3306.10 had been affirmed in subsequent proceedings. The final classification attained finality when the coordinate bench decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court, leaving no basis to sustain the contrary classification adopted in the impugned order.
Conclusion: The product was correctly classifiable under Chapter Heading 3306.10 as tooth powder, not under Chapter Heading 2404.99 as manufactured tobacco, and the impugned demand and penalties were unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the classification of a product has been conclusively settled in prior proceedings on the basis of common parlance and affirmed by the Supreme Court, the same classification must be followed in later proceedings concerning the identical product.