https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339502 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, confirming duty demands against the respondent for importing parts/components for jewelry manufacturing. The Tribunal classified the imported gold mountings as jewelry under the Tariff, emphasizing their finished jewelry character. It held that CBEC circulars couldn't expand the notification's scope, citing their inconsistency with statutory provisions. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, upholding duty demands and interest under the Customs Act, 1962. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2018 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339502 The Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, confirming duty demands against the respondent for importing parts/components for jewelry manufacturing. The Tribunal classified the imported gold mountings as jewelry under the Tariff, emphasizing their finished jewelry character. It held that CBEC circulars couldn't expand the notification's scope, citing their inconsistency with statutory provisions. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, upholding duty demands and interest under the Customs Act, 1962. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339502