<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (7) TMI 1278 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775210</link>
    <description>The SC dismissed appeals challenging CESTAT&#039;s decision regarding customs duty exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs for lithium ion battery components. The appellant imported parts at concessional rates to manufacture lithium ion batteries, which were then used captively to produce power banks. Revenue denied exemption claiming the final product was power banks, not lithium ion batteries. CESTAT held that since imported raw materials were utilized to manufacture lithium ion batteries as intermediate products before final assembly into power banks, the exemption was properly claimed. The tribunal found the appellant correctly availed the benefit as the imported components were used for manufacturing lithium ion batteries, even though these batteries were subsequently incorporated into power banks for captive consumption. SC found no grounds to interfere with CESTAT&#039;s reasoning and dismissed the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:25:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1278 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775210</link>
      <description>The SC dismissed appeals challenging CESTAT&#039;s decision regarding customs duty exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs for lithium ion battery components. The appellant imported parts at concessional rates to manufacture lithium ion batteries, which were then used captively to produce power banks. Revenue denied exemption claiming the final product was power banks, not lithium ion batteries. CESTAT held that since imported raw materials were utilized to manufacture lithium ion batteries as intermediate products before final assembly into power banks, the exemption was properly claimed. The tribunal found the appellant correctly availed the benefit as the imported components were used for manufacturing lithium ion batteries, even though these batteries were subsequently incorporated into power banks for captive consumption. SC found no grounds to interfere with CESTAT&#039;s reasoning and dismissed the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>