Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 imported refrigerator goods were correctly classifiable under Heading 8418 10 90 rather than Heading 8418 21 00, and whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. dated 31-8-2004.
Analysis: The goods were held to be combined refrigerators/freezers with separate external doors and, on the same facts as in the appellant's earlier case, were found to fall specifically under Heading 8418 10 90. Since the tariff itself covered the goods under that heading, Rule 3(c) had no application. Once the goods were so classified, the exemption under Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. was not available. The Tribunal also noted that an incorrect assessment cannot be perpetuated merely because a similar error may have occurred earlier, and relied on the settled principle that wrong orders should not be continued under Article 14.
Conclusion: The classification under Heading 8418 10 90 was upheld and the denial of exemption under Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. was sustained.