1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- 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.
<h1>Appeals admitted challenging classification: products under chapter 3003.39 versus food supplements under 2108.99 of CETA</h1> The SC admitted the appeals concerning whether the products are classifiable under chapter 3003.39 or as food supplements under 2108.99 of CETA. It noted ... Classification of goods - whether the product Reishi Gano and Ganocelium are classifiable under chapter 3003.39 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, as contended by appellants or as food supplements under 2108.99 of CETA? - tax along with interest has already been paid under protest - HELD THAT:- The appeals are admitted. Tax along with interest has already been paid under protest. Penalty amount will also be paid by the appellants within four weeks. 'Delay condoned.' The appeals were admitted. It is recorded that tax along with interest has been paid 'under protest.' The appellants are directed to pay the penalty amount within four weeks. All such payments are to remain 'subject to the result of the appeals.' Procedural relief therefore includes condonation of delay and admission of the appeals, with interim financial compliance required from the appellants while preservation of their substantive appellate rights is expressly maintained.