1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
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>Imported Raw Silk Cess Duty Upheld by Tribunal</h1> The Tribunal held that a cess of 0.05% on imported raw silk is leviable under the Textile Committee Act, separate from customs duty. The Collector's ... Cess - Additional customs duty Issues:1. Whether cess of 0.05% on imported raw silk is leviable under the Textile Committee (Amendment) Act, 1963 and Cess Rules, 1975.2. Whether the Collector (Appeals) was justified in setting aside the order-in-original regarding the levy of cess.3. Whether imported goods used in the Handloom Industry are exempt from the levy of cess.Analysis:1. The judgment deals with revenue appeals challenging the Collector (Appeals) order regarding the levy of cess on imported raw silk. The Collector (Appeals) held that no cess is leviable under the Textile Committee Act, setting aside the order of the Assistant Collector. The Revenue contended that cess duty at the rate of 0.05% is leviable on imported goods as per the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of the Textile Committee Act and the Customs Tariff Act, emphasizing that the levy of cess is separate from customs duty. The Tribunal held that the cess is leviable under the Textile Committee Act, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the Revenue.2. The Revenue argued that the Collector was not justified in setting aside the order-in-original regarding the levy of cess. The Tribunal considered previous judgments and held that the levy of cess under the Textile Committee Act is distinct from customs duty. It was noted that the short levy was demanded under the Customs Tariff Act and the Cess Textile Committee (Amendment) Act, 1963. The Tribunal upheld the Revenue's contention that cess duty is leviable on imported goods specified in the Textile Committee Act, and the Collector's decision was set aside.3. The issue of exemption from cess for imported goods used in the Handloom Industry was raised by the consultant for the respondents. The consultant argued that the imported goods used for manufacturing textiles in the Handloom Industry were exempt from cess. However, the Tribunal clarified that the exemption in the notification pertained to the cess levied under the Textile Committee Act, not the customs duty under the Customs Tariff Act. The Tribunal emphasized that there was no independent notification exempting the levy of customs duty. Therefore, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue, stating that the customs duty at the rate of 0.05% was applicable to the imported goods, and the appeal was allowed based on previous judgments and legal provisions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
