<?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>2009 (10) TMI 301 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76485</link>
    <description>Dress perfumes were analysed for tariff classification under Heading 3303.00 versus residuary Heading 3307.90, with the exemption under Notification No. 167/86-C.E. depending on that classification. The Tribunal noted an earlier decision covering the same product and accepted that the HSN note to Heading 3303 requires only that the perfume be designed to give fragrance primarily to the human body; direct application on the body is not necessary. On that reasoning, the product remained classifiable under Heading 3303.00 and qualified for the exemption, so the residuary entry was not attracted and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114693" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 301 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76485</link>
      <description>Dress perfumes were analysed for tariff classification under Heading 3303.00 versus residuary Heading 3307.90, with the exemption under Notification No. 167/86-C.E. depending on that classification. The Tribunal noted an earlier decision covering the same product and accepted that the HSN note to Heading 3303 requires only that the perfume be designed to give fragrance primarily to the human body; direct application on the body is not necessary. On that reasoning, the product remained classifiable under Heading 3303.00 and qualified for the exemption, so the residuary entry was not attracted and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76485</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>