Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
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.