Advanced Search Results

National Insulated Cable Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Tariff Act, 1975; ;Customs Act, 1962 - Section 17; ;Customs Tariff Rules - Rule 4

Reported in : 1987(12)ECC407,1987(28)ELT248(Cal)

electric cables, is Synthetic Rubber or Synthetic Resin for its proper classification under the appropriate heading of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for the purpose of the assessment of Customs duty.2. The petitioner No. 1 in both the Rules is … Resin and not Synthetic Rubber as claimed by the petitioners and demanded Customs duty at higher rates under Chapter 39 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 instead of assessing the same- as Synthetic Rubber under Chapter 40

Haryana Ship-breakers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Tariff Act, 1975

Reported in : 1997(96)ELT541(Guj); (1996)1GLR623

leviable on the vessels for breaking up as provided under Chapter 89, Heading 89.08 and sub-heading 8908.00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The duty is leviable at 40 per cent ad valorem plus Rs. 1,400/- per Light Displacement Tonnage (L.D.T.).

Dass Colour Lab Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Chennai

Subject : Customs

Reported in : 1993(42)ECC243

definition to the word 'Industrial plant' occurring in tariff Heading No. 98.01 in the First Schedule to The Customs Tariff Act, 1975, The Customs authorities refused to assess the duty under the heading and held that duty should be paid … the main features of the new first schedule are as follows:(i) The Harmonized System of nomenclature comprising 97 Chapters along with its general interpretative rules, Section Notes, Chapter Notes and sub-heading Notes has been totally adopted;(ii) The … view of the definition of 'industrial plant' in the Project Imports Regulations, 1986 which came into force on April 3,1986. In three of the writ

Vetcare Alltech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (2004)(116)LC373Tri(Chennai)

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Vikram Cement Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Sections 4; Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - Sections 3; Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 3A; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 32; Additional Duties of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles) Act, 1978 - Sections 3; Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 - Sections 3; Mining Act; Factories Act; Cenvat Credit Rules, 2000 - Rules 52A, 49(1) and 173G(1); Cenvat Credit (Amendment) Rules, 2001 - Rules 2 and 57AA; Cenvat Credit (Amendment) Rules, 2002 - Rule 2; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 57A, 57A(4), 57B, 57B(1), 57AA, 57AB, 57AC, 57G, 57J, 57Q, 57Q(1), 57R, 57S, 57S(7), 57T and 57T(5); Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 - Rule 12; Central Excise (Amendment) Rules, 2001 - Rule 4(3); Central Excise (Amendment) Rules,

Reported in : 2005(102)ECC121; 2005(187)ELT145(SC); JT2005(7)SC637; (2005)7SCC74

purpose of allowing credit of any duty of excise or the additional duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as may be specified in the said notification (hereafter, in this section, referred to as … to the earlier Modvat scheme.3. The assessees are engaged in the manufacture of cement and clinker falling under chapter 25 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They use explosives, welding electrodes, lubricating oil and crusher for extraction … together. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Civil Appeal No. 1197 of 2005 are mentioned herein below.Three show-cause notices dated 26.8.2000, 10.2.2003 and

A. Kumar Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Tariff Act, 1975; Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931; Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act, 1982; Income-Tax Act - Sections 132A; Contempt of Courts Act - Sections 11 and 12; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 15 and 59; Constitution of India - Articles 19(1), 226, 265 and 300A;

Reported in : ILR1982Delhi1008

promise express or implied that the duty will be or could be less than what is specified in Chapter 73.15 of the Schedule I to the Customs Tariff Act. 1975. Promissory estoppel must first be a promise … the time the order was placed with the foreign firm or entered the territorial waters, according to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 the duty chargeable for coils for re-rolling bars (including bright bars), rods, wire rods, strips, sheets and plates … 1. The petitioner, the sole proprietor A. Kumar of the Indian Steel Corporation,

Indian Steel Corporation, Madras Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 11, 12, 14, 15 and 59

Reported in : 1982(10)ELT877(Del)

promise express or implied that the duty will be or could be less than what is specified in Chapter 73.75 of the Schedule I to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Promissory estoppel must first be a promise … the time the order was placed with the foreign firm or entered the territorial waters, according to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 the duty chargeable for coils for rerolling, bars (including bright bars), rods, wire rods, strips, sheets and plates … 1. The petitioner, the sole proprietor A. Kumar of the Indian Steel Corporation,

Collr. of Customs Vs. National Insulated Cable Co. Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Tariff Act, 1975; ;Customs Act, 1962 - Section 17; ;Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 4

Reported in : 1994(46)ECC101,1994(74)ELT568(Cal)

imported was synthetic resin and not synthetic rubber. The Customs authorities demanded customs duty at higher rates under chapter 39 of the Customs Act, 1962 [First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975] instead of assessing the … of electric cables is synthetic rubber or synthetic resin for its proper classification under the appropriate heading of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for the purpose of assessment to customs duty. The relevant facts as noted by the Trial Court are … Sengupta, J. This appeal arises out of a Judgment and Order dated 16th January, 1987, passed by Mr. Justice Sudhir Ranjan Roy, the learned Trial

Akbar BadrudIn Jiwani of Bombay Vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Customs

Acts : Import (Control) Order, 1955; Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 111, 112, 125 and 130E; Customs Tariff Amendment Act, 1985; Customs Tariff Amendment Act, 1986; Customs Tariff Act, 1975; Indian Tariff Act, 1934; Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 - Sections 3(1); Central Excise Act

Reported in : AIR1990SC1579; 1990(27)ECC69; 1990(47)ELT161(SC); JT1990(1)SC256; 1990(1)SCALE176; (1990)2SCC203; [1990]1SCR369; 1990(1)LC514(SC)

a separate import schedule annexed to it. This import schedule was aligned with the import schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The import schedule under the Import (Control) Order itself did hot contain any rules of interpretation, section notes … import licence obtained from the respondent. In Appendix I-B, Schedule I of ITC Schedule, Entry No. 25.15 of Chapter 25 (Mineral Products) mentions:Marble travertine, ecaussine and any other calcareous monumental or building stone of an apparent specific … ORDERB.C. Ray, J.1. This appeal under Section 130-E(b) of the Customs Act,1962 is directed against the judgment and order dated

Union of India Vs. M/S g.s. Chatha Rice Mills

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Section 8A of the Customs Tariff Act 1975.3 By this notification, a new tariff entry was introduced in Chapter 98 of Section XXI in the following terms: (1) “9806 00 00 (2) All goods originating in or … 14 February 2019. On 16 February 2019, the Union Government issued a notification under Section 8A of the Customs Tariff Act 1975. The notification introduced a tariff entry by which all goods originating in or exported from the Islamic Republic