<?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>1990 (7) TMI 227 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80740</link>
    <description>Central excise classification of Dant Manjan Lal turned on common parlance, trade understanding and principal use: the product was treated as a tooth powder for dental cleansing rather than an Ayurvedic medicine or drug, and the later inclusion of Ayurvedic Sar Sangrah in the Drugs and Cosmetics Act did not alter its excise character for the relevant period. It was therefore classifiable under Tariff Item 68 and denied exemption under Notification No. 55/75 as amended by Notification No. 62/78. A separate claim for exemption under Notification No. 179/77, based on non-use of power, was held open for reconsideration in de novo proceedings, with opportunity of hearing and decision on evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 10:44:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 227 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80740</link>
      <description>Central excise classification of Dant Manjan Lal turned on common parlance, trade understanding and principal use: the product was treated as a tooth powder for dental cleansing rather than an Ayurvedic medicine or drug, and the later inclusion of Ayurvedic Sar Sangrah in the Drugs and Cosmetics Act did not alter its excise character for the relevant period. It was therefore classifiable under Tariff Item 68 and denied exemption under Notification No. 55/75 as amended by Notification No. 62/78. A separate claim for exemption under Notification No. 179/77, based on non-use of power, was held open for reconsideration in de novo proceedings, with opportunity of hearing and decision on evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>