Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
921 to 940 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Classification of imported goods - medical grade monitor - to be classified under heading 8529 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - monitors of every kind covered under heading 8528, comprising four tariff lines, two pertaining to cathode-ray tube monitors, others covering every other type - lack of distinction between monitors used with automated data processing machines and others - adopted heading not residual - classification proposed in show cause notice and confirmed in impugned order upheld - impugned order traversed beyond show cause notice, attempting classification exclusively by resort to rule 1 of General Rules for Interpretation of Import Tariff - affirmation of rule 3 does not permit such finding as classification declared by importer not inapt, only loses out by degree of specificity - penalty u/s 114A of Customs Act, 1962 - no finding on manner of misdeclaration or willful misstatement with intention to evade duty payment - remanded to original authority for specific finding on invocation of section 114A for penalty imposition.
Classification of imported goods - medical grade monitor - to be classified under heading 8529 of First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - monitors of every kind covered under heading 8528, comprising four tariff lines, two pertaining to cathode-ray tube monitors, others covering every other type - lack of distinction between monitors used with automated data processing machines and others - adopted heading not residual - classification proposed in show cause notice and confirmed in impugned order upheld - impugned order traversed beyond show cause notice, attempting classification exclusively by resort to rule 1 of General Rules for Interpretation of Import Tariff - affirmation of rule 3 does not permit such finding as classification declared by importer not inapt, only loses out by degree of specificity - penalty u/s 114A of Customs Act, 1962 - no finding on manner of misdeclaration or willful misstatement with intention to evade duty payment - remanded to original authority for specific finding on invocation of section 114A for penalty imposition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.