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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2009 (1) TMI 269 - AT - Customs

        📋
        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

        Tribunal: Mobile handset parts qualify for duty exemption, valuation based on CIF terms. The Tribunal held that the imported goods were parts and components of mobile handsets, eligible for customs duty exemption under Notification No. ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal: Mobile handset parts qualify for duty exemption, valuation based on CIF terms.

                          The Tribunal held that the imported goods were parts and components of mobile handsets, eligible for customs duty exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. The Tribunal also ruled that the valuation should be based on the renegotiated CIF terms. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside entirely, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Classification of imported goods.
                          2. Eligibility for customs duty exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus.
                          3. Valuation of imported goods.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Classification of Imported Goods:
                          The central issue was whether the imported goods, described as "Parts, components & accessories of cellular phones" and "Parts, components & accessories of mobile handsets," should be classified as parts under CTH 85259090 or as complete cellular phones under CTH 85252017. The lower authorities concluded that the goods were complete cellular phones in disassembled/unassembled condition and should be classified under CTH 85252017. The appellants argued that the goods were parts and components, which were assembled into mobile handsets in their factory, and thus should be classified under CTH 85259090.

                          2. Eligibility for Customs Duty Exemption:
                          The appellants claimed full exemption from customs duty under Sl. No. 320 of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., which exempts "Parts, components & accessories of mobile handsets including Cellular phones" from customs duty, provided the importer follows the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. The lower authorities denied this exemption, asserting that the goods were complete handsets and not parts. The appellants contended that they adhered to the required procedures and that the parts were assembled into handsets in their factory, thus qualifying for the exemption.

                          3. Valuation of Imported Goods:
                          The appellants argued that the valuation of certain consignments should be based on CIF (Cost, Insurance, and Freight) terms instead of FOB (Free on Board) due to delayed shipments and renegotiation with the supplier. The lower authorities did not accept this adjustment and included freight charges in the valuation, leading to a higher assessable value and differential duty demand. The appellants maintained that the renegotiated CIF terms were valid and should be recognized.

                          Judgment Analysis:

                          Classification of Imported Goods:
                          The Tribunal held that the parts, components, and accessories imported by the appellants were indeed parts of mobile handsets and not complete handsets. The Tribunal referenced the case of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., where similar parts were classified under Chapter Heading 852990.90 and granted exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. The Tribunal emphasized that the assembly of parts into handsets, including software loading, occurred in the appellants' factory, thus supporting the classification as parts.

                          Eligibility for Customs Duty Exemption:
                          The Tribunal found that the appellants had followed the required procedures under the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. The Tribunal concluded that the parts and components imported by the appellants qualified for the exemption under Sl. No. 320 of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. The Tribunal rejected the lower authorities' assertion that the goods were complete handsets, noting that the assembly and software loading occurred in the appellants' factory.

                          Valuation of Imported Goods:
                          The Tribunal accepted the appellants' argument regarding the renegotiated CIF terms. The Tribunal noted that the supplier had agreed to the CIF terms due to delayed shipments, and there was no additional payment made by the appellants to the supplier. The Tribunal concluded that the valuation should be based on the CIF terms, without loading the freight charges, thus invalidating the differential duty demand based on the higher assessable value.

                          Conclusion:
                          The Tribunal set aside the impugned order in its entirety, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The Tribunal held that the imported goods were parts and components of mobile handsets, eligible for customs duty exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., and that the valuation should be based on the renegotiated CIF terms.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found