Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
n-Hexane was classified as a separate chemically defined compound under Chapter 29 rather than as petroleum oil or motor spirit under Chapter 27. The Court held that the Revenue bore the burden of proving Chapter 27 classification and failed to show that the product satisfied all motor spirit conditions, including suitability for use as fuel in spark ignition engines. Applying Rule 3(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation, it preferred the more specific HSN description for hexane as an acyclic saturated hydrocarbon. It further found that manufacturing impurities did not convert the product into a mixture, and relied on the DGFT circular supporting Chapter 29 treatment. The Revenue's classification claim was rejected.
n-Hexane was classified as a separate chemically defined compound under Chapter 29 rather than as petroleum oil or motor spirit under Chapter 27. The Court held that the Revenue bore the burden of proving Chapter 27 classification and failed to show that the product satisfied all motor spirit conditions, including suitability for use as fuel in spark ignition engines. Applying Rule 3(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation, it preferred the more specific HSN description for hexane as an acyclic saturated hydrocarbon. It further found that manufacturing impurities did not convert the product into a mixture, and relied on the DGFT circular supporting Chapter 29 treatment. The Revenue's classification claim was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.