ALO Partners Logo

𝐀𝐚𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐚 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 (𝐀𝐋𝐒)

Tag: #IndirectTaxLitigations

  • CESTAT Chennai- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    CESTAT Chennai- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 14.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai- Classification under CTH 95062900 upheld for swim seats, arm bands, fins, and paddles

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, ruled in favour of M/s. Page Industries Ltd., setting aside the reclassification orders passed by lower authorities and confirming that various imported swimming aids and accessories were appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 95062900 as water sports equipment.

    Case Background

    • Importer: M/s. Page Industries Ltd., Bengaluru
    • Disputed Goods: Sea Squad Swim Seats, Arm Bands, Bio-Fuse Fitness Fins, Swimming Goggles, Headgear, and Fabric Hats (under the Speedo brand)
    • Original Claim: Classification under CTH 95062900 with applicable duty exemption under Notification No. 12/2012 (Sl. No. 503)
    • Department’s Reclassification: CTH 39269099 (articles of plastic) or CTH 95069990 (other sports equipment)
    • Key Contention: Whether the imported goods qualify as water sports equipment eligible for concessional customs duty

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Chennai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    CESTAT Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 13.05.2025

    CESTAT Kolkata Upholds Bed Sheet Classification Under CTH 6304

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench, dismissed the Department’s appeal and affirmed the classification adopted by Silpha Finvest Pvt. Ltd. for imported bed sheets made of 100% polyester. The Tribunal held that the goods were rightly classified under CTH 6304 and not under CTH 5407, rejecting the Revenue’s charge of misdeclaration and its demand for penalty and redemption fine.

    Case Snapshot

    • Importer: Silpha Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
    • Goods: Bed sheets made of 100% polyester
    • Declared Classification: CTH 6304 (Bedspreads & other furnishing articles)
    • Department’s Reclassification: CTH 5407 (Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn)
    • Show Cause Notice: Alleged misdeclaration and suppression
    • Adjudication Result: Classification changed; goods confiscated; duty, fine, and penalty imposed

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Kolkata

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Bangalore- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    CESTAT Bangalore- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 12.05.2025

    CESTAT Bangalore- Department’s attempt to reclassify under 8543 deemed unwarranted and unsupported

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench, dismissed the Department’s appeal in the case of Next Education India Pvt. Ltd., affirming the classification of student interactive response systems under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8471 60 29.

    Case Background:

    • Importer: Next Education India Pvt. Ltd., Kochi
    • Imported Goods: Student Interactive Response Systems (keypads and IR receivers)
    • Original Classification (By Importer): CTH 8471 60 29 – input/output units of ADP machines
    • Revised Classification (By Department): CTH 8543 70 99 – electrical apparatus with individual function
    • Disputed Duty: Arising from denial of exemption applicable to ADP-related products

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Bangalore

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 10.05.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai Orders Refund of SAD

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench, has ruled in favor of Varian Medical Systems International (India) Pvt. Ltd., ordering the refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) amounting to ₹2,87,801. The appeal arose after the refund was rejected by both the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the duty was paid by DHL and not by the appellant.

    Case Summary

    • Appellant: Varian Medical Systems International (India) Pvt. Ltd.
    • Refund Claim: ₹2,87,801/- for SAD under three Bills of Entry dated April–June 2017
    • Original Authority’s Rejection: Claimed refund was rejected on the ground that the SAD was paid by DHL
    • Ground for Appeal: TR-6 challans showed the appellant’s name as importer, proving they bore the duty burden

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Mumbai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Chennai Upholds TPS Exemption

    CESTAT Chennai Upholds TPS Exemption

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 09.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai Upholds TPS Exemption

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, dismissed an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & Aircargo), Chennai, and upheld the Order-in-Original allowing M/s. Sunstar Overseas Ltd. to claim duty exemption under the Target Plus Scheme (TPS) for the import of plastic granules.

    Case Background

    • Importer/Respondent: M/s. Sunstar Overseas Ltd., New Delhi
    • Exported Goods: Rice and spices
    • Imported Goods: Plastic granules under Notification No. 32/2005-Cus dated 08.04.2005 (TPS Benefit)
    • Allegation: Customs claimed that plastic granules were not directly related to exported items (rice/spices) and thus not eligible for TPS exemption due to lack of “broad nexus”

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Chennai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Bangalore Allows Refund to Nokia India

    CESTAT Bangalore Allows Refund to Nokia India

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 09.05.2025

    CESTAT Bangalore Allows Refund to Nokia India

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench has delivered a major win for M/s. Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., allowing refunds of excess Countervailing Duty (CVD) paid on mobile phone imports and rejecting objections raised by Customs on the grounds of unjust enrichment and time-bar under Section 27 of the Customs Act.

    Case Snapshot

    • Importer: Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon
    • Goods: Mobile phones under CTH 85171290
    • Period: October 2014 to June 2015
    • Refund Claims: Based on the Supreme Court ruling in SRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (2015) holding such imports eligible for concessional duty under Notification No. 12/2012-CE
    • Issue: Refunds rejected on grounds that:
      • Bills of Entry were not appealed
      • Burden of duty was allegedly passed on (unjust enrichment)
      • Certain claims were beyond the one-year statutory time limit

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Bangalore

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Chennai- Valuation and Weight Allegations Not Sustainable

    CESTAT Chennai- Valuation and Weight Allegations Not Sustainable

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai- Valuation and Weight Allegations Not Sustainable

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench ruled in favor of M/s. Tech Zone Global Trading Company and several other importers, setting aside the confiscation, duty demands, and penalties imposed for allegedly misdeclaring the origin and value of imported PVC flex banners to evade anti-dumping duty (ADD).

    Case Background:

    • The importers were accused of routing Chinese-origin PVC flex banners through Malaysia, misusing Country of Origin (COO) certificates to claim AIFTA benefits and evade ADD.
    • The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) initiated action based on the allegation that importers, including Tech Zone, misdeclared the country of origin and underreported quantity and value.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Chennai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 08.05.2025

    CESTAT Mumbai- Customs Department directed to pay interest on pre-deposit as per Section 129EE

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench ruled in favor of Appellant, directing the Customs Department to pay interest on the delayed refund of pre-deposit. The case pertains to a refund claim made nearly 13 years after a partial success in appeal, where the interest component was denied by the lower authorities.

    Case Background:

    • Appellant: Appellant, Mumbai
    • Original Penalty: ₹5,00,000 for alleged involvement in misuse of a duty-free license
    • Pre-Deposit Made: ₹2,50,000 under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962
    • Appeal Outcome (2006): Penalty reduced to ₹1,00,000
    • Refund Claim Filed: December 2006 for balance ₹1,50,000
    • Refund Sanctioned: March 2019 — without interest
    • Appeal Filed for Interest: Rejected in 2021 by Commissioner (Appeals)

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Mumbai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT New Delhi- Customs restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and no misrepresentation or suppression was proven

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, by order dated May 2, 2025, set aside the confiscation, duty demand, and penalties imposed via Order-in-Original dated 19.05.2010. The case centered on the import of a Bell 407 helicopter under exemption Notification No. 21/2002-Cus as amended by Notification No. 61/2007-Cus and the alleged misuse of the duty exemption granted under Condition No. 104.

    Background of the Case:

    • Importer: M/s. Sky Airways (a Division of G.S.I. Pvt. Ltd.)
    • Aircraft Imported: Bell 407 Helicopter
    • Date of Import: January 2008
    • Declared Use: Non-Scheduled (Passenger) Services
    • Exemption Claimed: Notification No. 21/2002-Cus (S.No. 347B) subject to Condition No. 104

    The helicopter was imported for non-scheduled passenger services, and a statutory undertaking was provided that it would be used accordingly. However, the department alleged the aircraft was operated as a charter service, not a passenger service, by a third-party entity, violating the notification terms.

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT New Delhi

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com

  • CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

    Date: 06.05.2025

    CESTAT Chennai Sets Aside Duty Demand on Ingram Micro India Over Inordinate Adjudication Delay

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench allowed the appeal filed by M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., setting aside the differential customs duty demand imposed by the Adjudicating Authority after a 13-year delay in adjudication. The Tribunal invoked the principle of reasonable timeliness in quasi-judicial proceedings, reinforcing that prolonged administrative inaction cannot be used to penalize assessees.

    Case Overview:

    • Importer: M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai
    • Dispute: Classification of “Loose Tube Optical Fibre Cables”
    • Original Classification: Claimed under a concessional entry attracting Notification No. 24/2005-Cus.
    • Departmental Re-classification: Re-classified under CTH 9001, denying exemption
    • Show Cause Notice (SCN): Issued in 2007
    • Order-in-Original: Passed only in October 2020
    • First Appellate Order: Upheld the demand (March 2021)

    This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate Delhi High Court based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.

    Source: CESTAT Chennai

    Disclaimer

    Handy Download:

    ALO DocumentDownload

    Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

    Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

    www.aadrikaalaw.com