We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic • Quick overview summary answering your query with references• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced • Includes everything in Basic • Detailed report covering: - Overview Summary - Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars] - Relevant Case Laws - Tariff / Classification / HSN - Expert views from TaxTMI - Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
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.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
<h1>PVC Resin SP 660 classified under CTH 3904 2110, exemption under Notification 46/2011-Cus denied, appeal dismissed</h1> SC considered whether PVC Resin SP 660 Suspension Grade should be classified under CTH 3904 2110 as 'Poly (vinyl chloride) resins' as claimed by the ... Classification of PVC Resin SP 660 Suspension Grade - to be classified under CTH 3904 2110 as Poly (vinyl Chloride) resins, [appellant] or under CTH 3904 1090 as Poly (vinyl Chloride), not mixed with any other substances - applicability of benefit of N/N. 46/2011-Cus dated 1.6.2011 - it was held by CESTAT that 'the impugned order merits to be set aside and the appropriate Customs tariff heading for the impugned goods held to be 39042110.' HELD THAT:- There are no error in the order impugned - appeal dismissed. The Supreme Court, exercising its appellate jurisdiction, addressed an appeal arising from an order dated 21.07.2025 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). At the outset, the Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal, thereby permitting the matter to be heard on merits. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and examining the impugned CESTAT order, the Court held that it did 'not find any error in the order impugned.' On this basis, the civil appeal was dismissed, thereby affirming the decision of CESTAT. The Court further directed that all pending application(s), if any, stood disposed of as a consequence of the dismissal of the appeal.
TaxTMI 
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
