1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate Tribunal upholds dismissal of appeal due to failure to prove similarity of imported goods</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI dismissed the appeal as the appellant failed to prove that different goods imported had similar characteristics as ... Classification of goods - different parts of oil tanker - burden to prove - Held that:- When Rule 2(a) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is read that throws light that it was the burden of the assessee to prove that different goods came to India as presented through bill of entries should have similar characteristics of the principal goods - But that was not the case - appeal dismissed. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI dismissed the appeal as the appellant failed to prove that different goods imported had similar characteristics as the principal goods. The burden of proof was on the assessee to establish this similarity, which was not done.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
