Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        1995 (4) TMI 158 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        Contents
        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

        Tribunal overturns Collector's decision on Chocolate Eclairs classification The Tribunal set aside the Collector's decision to classify Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) and the demand made under the extended period, ...
                        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.

                            Tribunal overturns Collector's decision on Chocolate Eclairs classification

                            The Tribunal set aside the Collector's decision to classify Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) and the demand made under the extended period, ruling that both were not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of trade parlance in classification matters and found that the Collector's decisions were based solely on a Tariff Advice without considering how the goods were known and treated by the trade. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Classification of Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) based on the Board's Tariff Advice.
                            2. Validity of the demand confirmed by invoking the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Classification of Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) based on the Board's Tariff Advice:

                            The appellants were licensed for the manufacture of confectionery under Tariff Item 1A and boiled sweets under Item 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. Chocolate Eclairs were initially cleared under Tariff Item 68. However, after the issuance of Tariff Advice No. 114/81, dated 13-10-1981, which stated that Chocolate Eclairs containing more than 3.5% chocolate should be classified under Tariff Item 1A, the appellants were served with a show cause notice. The notice alleged that the Chocolate Eclairs manufactured by them, containing more than 3.5% chocolate, were classifiable under Tariff Item 1A. The Collector rejected the appellants' contention that their classification should remain unchanged, holding that the percentage of chocolate by weight in the disputed Chocolate Eclairs exceeded 3.5%, as revealed by reports from the Chemical Examiner and the Chief Chemist. The Collector classified the Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4).

                            Upon appeal, the Tribunal examined the historical changes in Tariff Item 1A and noted that the classification of Chocolate Eclairs had been a matter of dispute since 1969. The Tribunal referenced several judgments, including the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Collector of Customs v. Bhor Industries Ltd., which emphasized the relevance of trade parlance in classification matters. The Tribunal concluded that the Collector's order was not sustainable as it was based solely on a Tariff Advice issued by the Board and not on any independent inquiries into how the goods were known and treated by the trade. Therefore, the classification of Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) was deemed unsustainable.

                            2. Validity of the demand confirmed by invoking the extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944:

                            The Collector held that by not declaring the actual percentage of chocolate in Chocolate Eclairs, the appellants had suppressed facts, justifying the invocation of the extended period for demand under the proviso to Section 11A. The appellants argued that the composition of Chocolate Eclairs had remained unchanged since 1967 and that their classification under Tariff Item 68 had been accepted by the Department in previous proceedings. They contended that the adoption of the 3.5% chocolate content criterion was arbitrary and that the extended period could not be invoked on this basis.

                            The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Indo-International Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., held that in the absence of a statutory definition, the classification should be based on trade parlance. The Tribunal found that there was a long-standing practice of classifying Chocolate Eclairs as Confectionery under Tariff Item 68. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the demand confirmed by the Collector under the extended period was not sustainable, as it was based on an arbitrary criterion and not on any substantive change in the product or its classification.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, holding that the classification of Chocolate Eclairs under Tariff Item 1A(4) and the demand confirmed under the extended period were not sustainable.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found