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 rules in favor of classifying imported goods as prepared chemicals, not acrylic polymers.</h1> <h3>CLASSIC PLASTICS (P) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS</h3> CLASSIC PLASTICS (P) LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - 1992 (58) E.L.T. 297 (Tribunal) Issues: Classification of imported goods as prepared chemicals or acrylic polymers under Customs and Central Excise Tariff Act.In this case, the appellants sought classification of imported goods, 'Metablen P-551 (acrylic processing aid)' and 'Metablen C-201 (acrylic modifier),' as prepared chemicals under sub-heading 3823.90 of the Customs Tariff Act and 3823.00 of the Central Excise Tariff. On the other hand, the Department argued for classification as acrylic polymers under Heading 3906.90. The dispute arose from the conflicting interpretations of the nature of the imported goods, with the Department contending that they were acrylic polymers based on test results confirming thermoplastic properties. The appellants, however, maintained that the goods were prepared chemicals, emphasizing their usage as processing aids and impact modifiers in plastic manufacturing. The lower appellate authority upheld the classification as acrylic polymers, primarily relying on the test report. The key contention revolved around whether the imported goods should be classified as prepared chemicals or acrylic polymers under the relevant tariff headings.During the hearing, the Bench requested information regarding the chemical composition and manufacturing process of the imported goods. The appellants argued that such details were trade secrets not disclosed by the supplier. The Department, unable to provide remnant samples or conclusive information on the goods' shelf life, raised concerns about the lack of clarity on the role of the goods in plastic manufacturing. The matter was adjourned to enable the Department to obtain and present analytical data related to the products. Subsequently, the Department submitted queries to the Chemical Examiner, resulting in a test report that described the goods' properties but did not definitively classify them as prepared chemicals or acrylic polymers. The All India Plastics Manufacturers' Association provided a certificate asserting that processing aids and impact modifiers are not basic plastic raw materials but chemicals used in small percentages to enhance product properties, supporting the appellants' argument for classification as prepared chemicals.The Collector of Customs (Appeals) relied on chemical dictionaries to classify the goods as polymers under Heading 3906.90, emphasizing the presence of multiple monomers. However, the test report only identified the goods as having acrylic characteristics without a clear classification. The Department's inability to conclusively determine the goods' classification under Chapter 38 or Chapter 39 raised doubts about the accuracy of the classification as acrylic polymers. The Tribunal concluded that the burden of proof for classification had not been met by the Department, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and allowing the appeals in favor of classifying the goods as prepared chemicals rather than acrylic polymers under the relevant tariff headings.In summary, the case centered on the classification of imported goods as prepared chemicals or acrylic polymers, with the Department advocating for the latter based on test results indicating thermoplastic properties. However, the Tribunal found the evidence inconclusive and ruled in favor of classifying the goods as prepared chemicals, emphasizing the lack of definitive proof supporting the classification as acrylic polymers under the applicable tariff headings.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found