Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6041 to 6060 of 96363 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Whether the goods are classifiable as sugar confectionery (HTS 1704 9090) or as coffee preparations (HTS 2101 1200): tribunal held Rule 1 and Rule 3(a) govern classification, applying essential character test; evidence showed sugar is the principal ingredient imparting sweetness while coffee extract is a minor aromatic additive, so the product's essential character remains sugar confectionery - result: classified under 1704 9090. Burden of proof where department proposes a different heading: revenue failed to adduce evidence to rebut the assessee's showing (FSSAI/FSSR classification and product descriptions supporting "candy"), so departmental classification was unsustainable. - CESTAT
Whether the goods are classifiable as sugar confectionery (HTS 1704 9090) or as coffee preparations (HTS 2101 1200): tribunal held Rule 1 and Rule 3(a) govern classification, applying essential character test; evidence showed sugar is the principal ingredient imparting sweetness while coffee extract is a minor aromatic additive, so the product's essential character remains sugar confectionery - result: classified under 1704 9090. Burden of proof where department proposes a different heading: revenue failed to adduce evidence to rebut the assessee's showing (FSSAI/FSSR classification and product descriptions supporting "candy"), so departmental classification was unsustainable. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
