Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
CESTAT held that imported refined oils and candelilla wax qualified for exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs because approved laboratory reports showed the goods were of edible grade and there was no dispute on tariff classification. The notification required only that the goods fall under the specified headings and be refined edible grade; it did not impose any end-use requirement. The Tribunal also held that a CBEC circular could not add a condition not found in the notification, so the importer's declared use in cosmetics or pharmaceuticals could not defeat the exemption. The appellate order granting benefit under Serial Nos. 64 and 71 was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.