Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
CESTAT held that synthetic casting tapes are properly classifiable under CTH 30059040 rather than CTH 9021. The Tribunal relied on precedent from Johnson & Johnson case which established that Deltalite Casting Tapes fall under sub-heading 3005.10. The Tribunal determined that the goods were not devices/instruments/appliances that would warrant classification under Heading 90.21. Regarding limitation period, CESTAT upheld the invocation of extended period under Section 28(4) of Customs Act, finding that appellant could not claim ignorance of relevant precedential orders from 1999-2000 when filing Bills of Entry. The appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.