Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6321 to 6340 of 96332 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Activity trackers/fitness bands were held classifiable under CTI 8517 6290 because their principal function extended beyond pedometer-like step counting and included tracking and communication-linked fitness outputs through a paired application; the residual tariff entry was therefore applied and the classification under CTI 9029 1090 was rejected. The extended period of limitation was not available because the classification issue was already within departmental knowledge, the goods had been examined under customs control, and no suppression, wilful misstatement, collusion or fraud was shown. Only differential duty with applicable interest for the normal period was sustained. Alleged DGFT labelling non-compliance did not justify confiscation, redemption fine or penalty.
Activity trackers/fitness bands were held classifiable under CTI 8517 6290 because their principal function extended beyond pedometer-like step counting and included tracking and communication-linked fitness outputs through a paired application; the residual tariff entry was therefore applied and the classification under CTI 9029 1090 was rejected. The extended period of limitation was not available because the classification issue was already within departmental knowledge, the goods had been examined under customs control, and no suppression, wilful misstatement, collusion or fraud was shown. Only differential duty with applicable interest for the normal period was sustained. Alleged DGFT labelling non-compliance did not justify confiscation, redemption fine or penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
