Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1061 to 1080 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that identical Electronic Power Steering ECU goods were governed by its earlier final order in the appellant's own case, and that binding coordinate-bench discipline required the same classification result because the earlier order had not been stayed despite challenge. It distinguished the later Chennai Bench view, noting that decision did not consider the appellant's prior case and turned on different facts. On that basis, EPS-ECU remained classifiable under CTI 8708 94 00 and not under CTI 9032 90 00. The impugned classification was upheld and the appeals were dismissed.
The Tribunal held that identical Electronic Power Steering ECU goods were governed by its earlier final order in the appellant's own case, and that binding coordinate-bench discipline required the same classification result because the earlier order had not been stayed despite challenge. It distinguished the later Chennai Bench view, noting that decision did not consider the appellant's prior case and turned on different facts. On that basis, EPS-ECU remained classifiable under CTI 8708 94 00 and not under CTI 9032 90 00. The impugned classification was upheld and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
