PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Handheld mobile barcode scanners with ancillary telephony/Wi-Fi functions were assessed for classification under CTH 84716050 versus CTH 85171300. Applying the principal function rule under Chapter Note 8 to Chapter 84, the Board circular on devices where calling is only supplementary, and the trade parlance test, the tribunal found the goods were predominantly used as barcode scanners for logistics and inventory management. Product design (larger size with handle) and contemporaneous documents (brochures, invoices, packing lists) described them as handheld scanners, and the department produced no evidence that mobile calling was the primary function. Classification as mobile phones was set aside and classification under CTH 84716050 was accepted; appeals were allowed. - CESTAT
Handheld mobile barcode scanners with ancillary telephony/Wi-Fi functions were assessed for classification under CTH 84716050 versus CTH 85171300. Applying the principal function rule under Chapter Note 8 to Chapter 84, the Board circular on devices where calling is only supplementary, and the trade parlance test, the tribunal found the goods were predominantly used as barcode scanners for logistics and inventory management. Product design (larger size with handle) and contemporaneous documents (brochures, invoices, packing lists) described them as handheld scanners, and the department produced no evidence that mobile calling was the primary function. Classification as mobile phones was set aside and classification under CTH 84716050 was accepted; appeals were allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
