https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753450 CESTAT Mumbai allowed appeals challenging Commissioner of Customs' order that rejected applicability of an advance ruling on API supari classification. The Tribunal held that advance rulings under section 28I of Customs Act, 1962 are binding on customs administration across India until rescinded under section 28K or distinguished under section 28J(2). The adjudicating authority erred by treating the advance ruling as mere precedent rather than binding law, failed to properly analyze chapter note applicability to determine if goods fell under alternative classification, and exceeded adjudicatory powers by invalidating the ruling without following prescribed procedures for classification revision. en-us Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Jun 2024 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753450 CESTAT Mumbai allowed appeals challenging Commissioner of Customs' order that rejected applicability of an advance ruling on API supari classification. The Tribunal held that advance rulings under section 28I of Customs Act, 1962 are binding on customs administration across India until rescinded under section 28K or distinguished under section 28J(2). The adjudicating authority erred by treating the advance ruling as mere precedent rather than binding law, failed to properly analyze chapter note applicability to determine if goods fell under alternative classification, and exceeded adjudicatory powers by invalidating the ruling without following prescribed procedures for classification revision. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 17 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753450