Calling the Situation Grim, the Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Delays in NCLT Approvals  ||  Supreme Court: Admission of a Claim by a Resolution Professional is Not Debt Acknowledgment  ||  Supreme Court: Public Figures Must Exercise Caution as Their Words Have Consequences in Society  ||  SC: State Must Act as a Model Employer, Criticising the Union For Not Regularising ISRO Workers  ||  J&K&L High Court: Minor Minerals Have Major Environmental Impacts and Must be Regulated  ||  Del HC: Unexplained Money Received by Public Servant is Not Bribery Without Proof of Official Favour  ||  Del HC: There is No Absolute Bar on Granting Co-Convicts Parole/Furlough Together in Suitable Cases  ||  Bom HC: LARR Authority Can Examine Limitation Issues in Land Acquisition References under 2013 Act  ||  MP HC: Long-Serving Employees Cannot Be Denied Regularisation by Retrospective Statutory Amendments  ||  J&K&L HC: Routine Challenges to Lok Adalat Awards Defeat Their Purpose of Quick Dispute Resolution    

SC: 'Common Parlance' Test Applicable Only if Tariff Entry Classifiable in More Than One Head - (04 May 2020)

EXCISE

Supreme Court has dismissed the Delhi Central Excise Commissioner's appeals against the 2008 decision of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal holding that "car matting" would be chargeable to duty at 8% under the heading "Carpets and Other Textile Floor Coverings", stating that the common parlance test would only apply if tariff entry is classifiable in more than one head.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   COMMON PARLANCE TEST  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved