Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Customs Tariff Act, 1985

4 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAIversusM/S. HEWLETT PACKARD INDIA SALES (P) LTD.

2007 INSC 88630 August 2007Disposed off

The Commissioner of Customs appealed against Hewlett‑Packard India Sales Ltd., which had imported laptops with hard‑disk drives pre‑loaded with operating‑system software. The importer claimed that the software‑loaded hard disks should be classified separately under heading 85.24 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1985 and enjo

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), MUMBAIversusM/S. DILIP KUMAR AND COMPANY & ORS.

2018 INSC 64630 July 2018Reference answered

The case concerned the interpretation of Customs Notification No. 20/1999, under which the respondents claimed a concessional customs duty rate for imported vitamin E50 feed powder. The Customs department denied the benefit, classifying the goods under a higher duty heading, leading to a series of appeals up to the Sup

M/S. BHOR INDUSTRIES LTD.versusTHE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY

1999 INSC 48826 October 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a manufacturer of laminated textile fabrics, sought classification of its waste side strips and scrap (referred to as "foam patty") as non‑excisable items under Chapter 59 of the Customs Tariff Act. The Assistant Collector and the Appellate Authority classified the material as laminated fabrics, first as

M/S. XEROX INDIA LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI

2010 INSC 79722 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Xerox India Ltd. imported three multi‑functional machines that combine printing, scanning, copying and fax functions and sought classification under heading 8471.60 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1985. The Deputy Commissioner and subsequent authorities classified the machines under the residual heading 8479.89, prompting a

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search