Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
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 4821 
Join Channel 
