TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal overturns Collector's decision, clarifies tariff classification & exemption rules.</h1> <h3>INTERNATIONAL LINKERS (INDIA) Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the Collector (Appeals) decision and allowing the appeal. The judgment clarified the ... Classification Issues: Classification under Tariff Heading 39.01/06, Benefit of Exemption Notification No. 342/76-Cus.Classification under Tariff Heading 39.01/06:The appellants imported self-adhesive tapes and claimed exemption under Notification No. 342/76-Cus. The Customs House assessed the goods under Heading 39.01/06 of the CTA 1975 without granting the exemption. The Collector (Appeals) upheld the assessment, stating that the goods fell under Chapter 39 of CTA '75, and the appellants failed to provide evidence that the tapes were products of polymerisation or co-polymerisation, which was crucial for the exemption. The appellants' appeal challenged this decision.Benefit of Exemption Notification No. 342/76-Cus.:The main dispute was regarding the admissibility of the benefit of the exemption notification. The appellants argued that a Customs House Laboratory test report confirmed the goods were composed of Polyvinyl Chloride, covered by Serial No. 6 of the Notification, entitling them to a concessional duty rate. However, the respondent contended that the goods were finished articles, not in primary form as required by the notification. The Tribunal analyzed the notification's provisions, specifically Item 6(i)(c) covering 'Other forms' of Polyvinyl chloride, concluding that finished articles were also included. The Tribunal found that since the goods were assessed under Tariff Heading 39.01/06, which includes polymerisation or co-polymerisation products like Polyvinyl chloride, denying the exemption based on lack of evidence of polymerisation/co-polymerisation was unjustified. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the Collector (Appeals) decision and allowing the appeal.This judgment clarifies the classification under Tariff Heading 39.01/06 and the interpretation of the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 342/76-Cus. It emphasizes the importance of analyzing the specific provisions of the notification and aligning them with the actual classification of goods for determining the eligibility for duty exemptions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
