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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal overturns order, rules 'Hot Molten Mixture of Petroleum Jelly' not classified as such.</h1> The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal on merits, emphasizing the lack of conclusive evidence to classify the 'Hot Molten ... Petroleum jelly - Marketability Issues:1. Excisability and dutiability of 'Hot Molten Mixture of Petroleum Jelly' during the manufacturing process of antiseptic Boroline Cream.2. Classification of the mixture under the Central Excise Tariff.3. Marketability of the mixture in its hot molten stage.4. Compliance with the criteria for considering a product as petroleum jelly.5. Interpretation of Chemical Examiner reports and H.S.N. Explanatory Note.Analysis:1. Excisability and Dutiability:The dispute revolves around the excisability and dutiability of the 'Hot Molten Mixture of Petroleum Jelly' emerging during the manufacturing process of antiseptic Boroline Cream. The Department classified the mixture as petroleum jelly under sub-heading 2712.10 of the Central Excise Tariff, leading to a demand of duty and imposition of a penalty. The appellants contested this classification, arguing that the mixture is a new product comprising Mineral Hydro Carbons and Lanolin, distinct from petroleum jelly. They relied on a Chemical Examiner report stating the product did not meet the criteria for petroleum jelly classification.2. Classification under Central Excise Tariff:The Revenue maintained that the mixture, predominantly jelly with a small amount of lanolin, should be classified as petroleum jelly. They argued that the product's marketability was evidenced by its stability over time and its use as a cream base. The Commissioner contended that the mixture was commercially known as 'Cream Base' and was marketable, falling under a separate Tariff Heading of Chapter 27. The Revenue distinguished this case from a previous judgment, emphasizing the satisfaction of characteristics of petroleum jelly in the Chemical Examiner's second report.3. Marketability of Hot Molten Mixture:The key point of contention was the marketability of the hot molten mixture in its initial stage. The appellants asserted that the mixture was not marketable at this stage and could not be considered a distinct commodity in the market. They highlighted the transient shelf-life and argued that the product's marketability was unproven. The Commissioner, however, claimed that the mixture was commercially recognized and could be marketed, especially if allowed to cool.4. Compliance with Petroleum Jelly Criteria:The H.S.N. Explanatory Note outlined specific criteria for a product to be classified as petroleum jelly. The Chemical Examiner's report confirmed the congealing point and density of the mixture, aligning with petroleum jelly standards. However, the absence of a cone penetration test and ambiguity regarding the congealing point determination method raised doubts about the mixture's classification as petroleum jelly.5. Interpretation of Reports and Precedent:The Tribunal analyzed the Chemical Examiner reports, emphasizing the need for conclusive evidence to classify the mixture as petroleum jelly. Referring to a previous judgment, the Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to prove the marketability of the intermediate product, similar to the present case. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed on merits without addressing the limitation aspect.In conclusion, the judgment focused on the excisability, dutiability, classification, and marketability of the 'Hot Molten Mixture of Petroleum Jelly,' emphasizing the need for conclusive evidence, compliance with criteria, and precedent-based decision-making in resolving the dispute.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found