https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77784 CESTAT considered whether the product was zarda scented tobacco or flavoured chewing tobacco for excise classification and duty liability. The tribunal relied on product labelling and absence of any added zarda scent and on the manner of sale to characterize the goods as flavoured chewing tobacco; accordingly the classification as zarda scented tobacco was rejected and the resultant demand for differential duty and imposed penalties were set aside. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jan 2026 14:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77784 CESTAT considered whether the product was zarda scented tobacco or flavoured chewing tobacco for excise classification and duty liability. The tribunal relied on product labelling and absence of any added zarda scent and on the manner of sale to characterize the goods as flavoured chewing tobacco; accordingly the classification as zarda scented tobacco was rejected and the resultant demand for differential duty and imposed penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77784