Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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

        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>Tribunal overturns customs duty order in favor of importer, citing precedents</h1> <h3>M/s. Jatinder Sports Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), New Delhi</h3> M/s. Jatinder Sports Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), New Delhi - TMI Issues Involved:1. Whether the 125 consignments of toys imported by the appellant were rightly assessed to duty by extending tariff concession @ 43% under serial no. 427 of Part A of the notification dated July 22, 2005, or whether they should merit tariff concession @ 8% under serial no. 428 of Part A of the aforesaid notification.2. Whether the Department can take a different stand in the present matter despite having accepted similar orders by the Commissioner (Appeals) in other cases.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Assessment of Tariff Concession:The appellant, M/s. Jatinder Sports, challenged the order dated March 28, 2019, by the Principal Commissioner (Customs), which confirmed the demand of differential customs duty of Rs. 7,013,900.85/- under section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962. The core issue was whether the imported toys were correctly assessed under serial no. 427 of Part A of the notification dated July 22, 2005, which allows a tariff concession @ 43%, or whether they should fall under serial no. 428, allowing only an 8% concession.The Principal Commissioner argued that the toys did not fall under the categories specified in serial no. 427, and thus, the higher abatement was not justified. The appellant contended that the toys, including Train Series Toys, Rail Toy Series, and others, were covered under various sub-serial numbers of serial no. 427. However, the Principal Commissioner found these claims to be without merit, stating that specific categories such as electric trains with tracks, assembly kits for scaled models, and toy musical instruments were not met by the imported toys.2. Consistency in Departmental Stand:The appellant's counsel highlighted that similar orders denying higher abatement were set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals), and these decisions were accepted by the Department without further appeals. The counsel presented information obtained under the Right to Information Act, showing multiple instances where the higher abatement was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and accepted by the competent authority.The Tribunal considered the submission that once the Department had accepted the decisions of the Commissioner (Appeals) in similar cases, it could not take a different stand in the present case. The Tribunal examined a specific case of M/s. Ajay Impex, where the Joint Commissioner had confirmed the demand, but the Commissioner (Appeals) later set aside this order, stating that the adjudicating authority had not provided substantial evidence to deny the higher abatement.The Tribunal noted that the Principal Commissioner's order in the present case was identical to the earlier orders that were overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal cited the Supreme Court's decisions in Berger Paints India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax and Commissioner v. Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd., which established that the Department could not take different stands in similar cases once a decision had been accepted.Conclusion:The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the Department could not take a different stand in the present case after having accepted similar decisions in other cases. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order dated March 28, 2019, passed by the Principal Commissioner and allowed the appeal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found