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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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>Imported goods correctly classified as 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards' not CRM. Appellants exempt from duty.</h1> <h3>M/s. LGC Promochem India Pvt. Ltd., BR Suryanarayana Rao, New India Shipping Services And SS Prasad Partner Versus Commissioner of Customs and Service Tax Bangalore</h3> M/s. LGC Promochem India Pvt. Ltd., BR Suryanarayana Rao, New India Shipping Services And SS Prasad Partner Versus Commissioner of Customs and Service Tax ... Issues Involved:1. Classification of imported goods.2. Eligibility for exemption under Notifications No. 21/2002-Cus. and No. 12/2012-Cus.3. Compliance with Chapter Notes 2(A) and 2(B) of Chapter 38.4. Validity of extended period for demand of differential duty.5. Imposition of penalties on the appellants.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of Imported Goods:The main appellant classified the imported chemicals as 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards' under Customs Tariff Heading No. 3822 00 90. The Department argued that the goods were 'Certified Reference Materials' (CRM) and should be classified based on their chemical composition under respective Chapter Headings. The adjudicating authority rejected the appellant's classification and reclassified the goods under respective chapters based on chemical composition.2. Eligibility for Exemption under Notifications No. 21/2002-Cus. and No. 12/2012-Cus.:The appellant claimed the benefit of the said notifications, which provide reduced duty rates for 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards.' The Department contended that the goods did not qualify for the exemption as they were CRM and did not meet the conditions stipulated in Chapter Notes 2(A) and 2(B) of Chapter 38. The adjudicating authority denied the benefit of the notifications and confirmed the demand of differential duty.3. Compliance with Chapter Notes 2(A) and 2(B) of Chapter 38:The adjudicating authority held that the imported goods did not comply with Chapter Notes 2(A) and 2(B) of Chapter 38, which define CRM and their classification precedence. The appellant argued that the goods were not claimed as CRM and thus did not need to comply with these Chapter Notes. The Tribunal found that the goods imported were indeed 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards' and not CRM, and therefore, the Chapter Notes 2(A) and 2(B) were not applicable.4. Validity of Extended Period for Demand of Differential Duty:The adjudicating authority invoked the extended period for demanding differential duty, alleging intentional mis-declaration by the appellant. The Tribunal found that the appellant had declared the goods as 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards' and provided all necessary documents, which were accepted by the Customs authorities during clearance. The Tribunal held that the extended period was not applicable as there was no suppression of facts or mis-declaration by the appellant.5. Imposition of Penalties on the Appellants:The adjudicating authority imposed penalties on the main appellant and other appellants under various sections of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal, having set aside the demand for duty liability on merits and limitation, also set aside the penalties imposed on the appellants.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the imported goods were 'Pharmaceutical Reference Standards' and not CRM, making them eligible for the benefit of the exemption notifications. The demand for differential duty was set aside, and the extended period for demand was held to be invalid. Consequently, the penalties imposed on the appellants were also set aside. All appeals were allowed with consequential relief.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found