Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
No duty was payable on free warranty replacement inputs where the value of warranty was already embedded in the final product and the cleared goods fell within the scope of inputs used for providing free warranty under Notification No. 3/2011-CE (NT). The Tribunal held that the appellant's differential treatment between removed inputs and manufactured goods did not justify a duty demand, and the demand was unsustainable. On debit notes raised for repair charges on damaged inputs, the Tribunal found no evidence that the inputs were not subsequently used in manufacture; in the absence of proof of non-use, CENVAT credit remained admissible and duty could not be demanded on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
No duty was payable on free warranty replacement inputs where the value of warranty was already embedded in the final product and the cleared goods fell within the scope of inputs used for providing free warranty under Notification No. 3/2011-CE (NT). The Tribunal held that the appellant's differential treatment between removed inputs and manufactured goods did not justify a duty demand, and the demand was unsustainable. On debit notes raised for repair charges on damaged inputs, the Tribunal found no evidence that the inputs were not subsequently used in manufacture; in the absence of proof of non-use, CENVAT credit remained admissible and duty could not be demanded on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
