Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Books Submit Post Subscription
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax Tick-Tock! The 31st July ITR Alarm is Ringing – Is the Taxpayer Ready? Income Tax Chennai ITAT Deletes Interest Disallowance; No Notional Interest Can Be Imputed on Business Advances When Assessee Has Sufficient Own Funds Income Tax Chennai ITAT Quashes Section 263 Revision of Penalty Order; PCIT Cannot Revise Order That Has Merged with CIT(A)’s Appellate Decision Income Tax Chennai ITAT Deletes Demonetisation Addition; Cash Deposits Matching Audited Sales and VAT Returns Cannot Be Treated as Unexplained Income Tax Chennai ITAT Quashes Reassessment Where No Addition Was Made on the Recorded Reason for Reopening Income Tax Chennai ITAT Upholds Deletion of Ad Hoc Disallowances; GSTR-2A Is Strong Corroborative Evidence and Purchases Cannot Be Rejected Without Verification Income Tax Chennai ITAT Deletes ₹76.45 Lakh Addition; Once Source of Cash Is Proved, Revenue Cannot Rely on Suspicion About Its Temporary Utilisation Income Tax Chennai ITAT Quashes Reassessment Based Solely on AIR Information; Cash Deposits Must Be Examined with Reference to Business Turnover, Not Returned Income
Custom Duty

5G Vector Tester under Specific Telecom Equipment fall under HSN 90304000: CAAR Delhi

By CA Sandeep Kanoi Custom Duty Judiciary October 28, 2025
Share:

Case Law Details

Case Name
In re Rohde & Schwarz India Private Limited (CAAR Delhi)
Appeal Number
Only available for paid members
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Courts
Advance Rulings, CAAR
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.

Already Upgraded? Log in.

Advertisement
In re Rohde & Schwarz India Private Limited (CAAR Delhi) Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR), Delhi, in In re Rohde & Schwarz India Pvt. Ltd., determined the classification of the “PVT 360A Performance Vector Tester” under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The applicant sought classification under CTI 9030 40 00 as “other instruments and apparatus, specially designed for telecommunications,” while the jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate contended that the product should be classified under the residuary heading 9030 89 90 as “other instruments and apparatus.” Facts ...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Advertisement
Filed under

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Related Articles in Custom Duty
Aluminium Formwork Classifiable as Structure, Not Mould: CESTAT Kolkata Quashes Customs Duty Demand

Aluminium Formwork Classifiable as Structure, Not Mould: CESTAT Kolkata Quashes Customs Duty Demand

July 26, 2026
CESTAT Delhi Upholds Inclusion of Downloaded Software Licence Value In Imported Dongles’ Customs Value

CESTAT Delhi Upholds Inclusion of Downloaded Software Licence Value In Imported Dongles’ Customs Value

July 26, 2026
CESTAT Sets Aside Customs Duty Demand by Invalidating DRI Rejection of Origin Certificates

CESTAT Sets Aside Customs Duty Demand by Invalidating DRI Rejection of Origin Certificates

July 26, 2026
Madras HC Quashes Duty Drawback Demand Raised After 12-Year Delay

Madras HC Quashes Duty Drawback Demand Raised After 12-Year Delay

July 26, 2026
CESTAT Sets Aside Confiscation of Exotic Birds for Lack of Smuggling Proof

CESTAT Sets Aside Confiscation of Exotic Birds for Lack of Smuggling Proof

July 25, 2026
CESTAT Quashes Confiscation of Gold for Curable Advance Authorisation Lapse

CESTAT Quashes Confiscation of Gold for Curable Advance Authorisation Lapse

July 25, 2026
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *