<?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>1989 (10) TMI 127 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80181</link>
    <description>Egg trays, egg cartons, tube light packing trays, duck egg trays and apple trays were held classifiable by reference to their trade identity and tariff description: they were not cartons, boxes or other paper containers, so Item 17(4) / 17(3) did not apply, exemption under Notification No. 66/82-C.E. was unavailable, and the goods fell under Item 68 for the pre-1986 period and Heading 4818.90 under the new tariff. Slurry was not exigible because marketability was not shown. A demand for short-levied duty was maintainable under Section 11A despite an approved classification list, but the larger limitation question for the earlier period required fresh determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 12:21:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (10) TMI 127 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80181</link>
      <description>Egg trays, egg cartons, tube light packing trays, duck egg trays and apple trays were held classifiable by reference to their trade identity and tariff description: they were not cartons, boxes or other paper containers, so Item 17(4) / 17(3) did not apply, exemption under Notification No. 66/82-C.E. was unavailable, and the goods fell under Item 68 for the pre-1986 period and Heading 4818.90 under the new tariff. Slurry was not exigible because marketability was not shown. A demand for short-levied duty was maintainable under Section 11A despite an approved classification list, but the larger limitation question for the earlier period required fresh determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>