Ask Jurishour AI

HomeIndirect TaxesSamsung Challenges $520 Million Tax Demand Before CESTAT, Cites Reliance’s Precedent in...

Samsung Challenges $520 Million Tax Demand Before CESTAT, Cites Reliance’s Precedent in Defence

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

Samsung has urged Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) to dismiss a $520 million tax demand over alleged misclassification of networking equipment imports, arguing that the practice was long known to tax authorities and mirrored the import approach previously adopted by Reliance Industries.

The South Korean tech major contends that Indian officials were fully aware of its classification method, which it claims followed Reliance Jio’s earlier practice of importing the same equipment without incurring tariffs between 2014 and 2017. Samsung’s challenge comes amid heightened scrutiny of foreign companies, with Volkswagen also contesting a $1.4 billion tax claim over similar issues.

In its 281-page filing before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in Mumbai, Samsung states that Indian authorities did not raise any objections to its imports until January 2024, when the company was asked to pay $520 million in duties for the 2018–2021 period.

Samsung asserts that it discovered, during a tax probe, that Reliance had been warned by authorities in 2017 about the classification practice. However, the company says it was never informed of this warning, nor was the classification questioned during years of similar imports.

“The classification adopted by Samsung was known to the authorities and never challenged… the Department was fully aware,” the company noted in its April 17 submission, which was reviewed by Reuters.

The details of the 2017 warning to Reliance remain confidential and were not included in Samsung’s filing. Reliance did not respond to media queries on the matter.

Read More: What Inspires Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman To Speak On Caste Census?

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Service Tax Demand on Irrigation Works Quashed: Karnataka HC Rules Sale of Goods Component Not Taxable as Service

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the service tax demand on irrigation works and...

Search Conducted After 1 April 2021 Triggers S. 148 Procedure: ITAT 

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has quashed a massive...

Excel Sheet Recovered From Third-Party Can’t By Itself, Establish Sufficient Nexus Between Alleged Cash Transactions And Assessee: ITAT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted an addition...

Tax Demand Rendered Irrecoverable Under NCLT Resolution Cut-Off: ITAT 

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the...

More like this

Service Tax Demand on Irrigation Works Quashed: Karnataka HC Rules Sale of Goods Component Not Taxable as Service

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the service tax demand on irrigation works and...

Search Conducted After 1 April 2021 Triggers S. 148 Procedure: ITAT 

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has quashed a massive...

Excel Sheet Recovered From Third-Party Can’t By Itself, Establish Sufficient Nexus Between Alleged Cash Transactions And Assessee: ITAT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted an addition...