https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781751 CESTAT held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 only revised duty rates and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the Commissioner (Appeals)' contrary conclusion factually incorrect. Relying on SC precedent prohibiting the department from changing its stand when earlier orders were accepted for the same appellant, CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:42:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781751 CESTAT held that the imported in-vitro diagnostic reagents are correctly classifiable under CTI 3822 0019 as "other diagnostic reagents for medical diagnosis" and not under the residual CTI 3822 0090. The Tribunal found that N/N. 16/2019 and 17/2019 only revised duty rates and did not alter the tariff description under heading 3822, rendering the Commissioner (Appeals)' contrary conclusion factually incorrect. Relying on SC precedent prohibiting the department from changing its stand when earlier orders were accepted for the same appellant, CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781751