<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (10) TMI 310 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75033</link>
    <description>Products made by steam distillation of herbs and spices, with added essential oils and attars, are classified by their composition and end use. On those facts, the goods were treated as mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures based on such substances used as raw material in gutkha and similar industries, so they fell under Chapter Heading 3302 rather than Heading 3301, and the exemption claim under Notification No. 167/1986-C.E. failed. Non-disclosure of the full manufacturing process and omission of Attar Shamma amounted to misdeclaration, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A, so the demand was not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 310 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75033</link>
      <description>Products made by steam distillation of herbs and spices, with added essential oils and attars, are classified by their composition and end use. On those facts, the goods were treated as mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures based on such substances used as raw material in gutkha and similar industries, so they fell under Chapter Heading 3302 rather than Heading 3301, and the exemption claim under Notification No. 167/1986-C.E. failed. Non-disclosure of the full manufacturing process and omission of Attar Shamma amounted to misdeclaration, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A, so the demand was not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>