Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Customs Tariff Act, 1985

4 judgments · newest first · showing 1–4

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

2018 INSC 646Reference 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 …

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

2010 INSC 797Appeal(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 …

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

2007 INSC 886Disposed 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 …

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

1999 INSC 488Appeal(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 …