https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376993 Delay of 21 days in filing the appeal was condoned under the statutory power available in GST law, the authority accepting the appellant's bona fide difficulty in navigating the new appellate procedure. On classification, jewellery articles fitted with a watch movement were held to fall specifically under Heading 9101 of the Customs Tariff Act, because Chapter 71 excludes articles of Chapter 91 and the relevant notes and HSN guidance cover watch-related jewellery forms. Since the goods were found to be specifically covered by Heading 9101, Rule 3(b) of the interpretative rules did not apply. The appeal therefore failed on merits and the advance ruling was upheld. en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376993 Delay of 21 days in filing the appeal was condoned under the statutory power available in GST law, the authority accepting the appellant's bona fide difficulty in navigating the new appellate procedure. On classification, jewellery articles fitted with a watch movement were held to fall specifically under Heading 9101 of the Customs Tariff Act, because Chapter 71 excludes articles of Chapter 91 and the relevant notes and HSN guidance cover watch-related jewellery forms. Since the goods were found to be specifically covered by Heading 9101, Rule 3(b) of the interpretative rules did not apply. The appeal therefore failed on merits and the advance ruling was upheld. Case-Laws GST Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376993