1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>CESTAT Chennai modifies order on goods classification under heading 3923.90, effective from 12-10-92.</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai modified the impugned order regarding the classification of goods under heading 3923.90, making the revised ... Classification- The dispute in this case relates to issue of Section 37B order dated 24-9-1992 classifying the impugned goods under heading 3923.90 and from when the revised classification would be effective. In the light of the decision of CCE, Bhubaneswar-I v. Ceeta Industries Ltd. - 2007 (217) E.L.T. 436 (Tri.-Kol.), held that- wherein it was held that the new classification would be effective from the date of issue of trade notice by the jurisdictional Commissioner, held that- the respondents are liable to pay duty under the revised tariff heading 3923.90 with effect from 12-10-92. The impugned order passed by the lower appellate authority is modified to that extent and the departmentβs appeal is partly allowed. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai modified the impugned order regarding the classification of goods under heading 3923.90, making the revised classification effective from 12-10-92 based on a trade notice issued on that date. The department's appeal was partly allowed.