<?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>1992 (3) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81701</link>
    <description>Neomycin Sulphate Capsules were treated as Patent &amp; Proprietary Medicine under Item 14E because the label and design, read as a whole, operated as a distinctive trade-connected symbol identifying the manufacturer. The discussion applies the test that a mark or monogram must distinguish the medicine from others in the market. It also notes that the demand aspect required fresh consideration because several assessee pleas were not examined, including invoicing, alleged third-party supply, exclusions from clearance, exemption eligibility, and the basis of duty calculation. A proper duty work-sheet and full hearing were required before any final adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:05:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (3) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81701</link>
      <description>Neomycin Sulphate Capsules were treated as Patent &amp; Proprietary Medicine under Item 14E because the label and design, read as a whole, operated as a distinctive trade-connected symbol identifying the manufacturer. The discussion applies the test that a mark or monogram must distinguish the medicine from others in the market. It also notes that the demand aspect required fresh consideration because several assessee pleas were not examined, including invoicing, alleged third-party supply, exclusions from clearance, exemption eligibility, and the basis of duty calculation. A proper duty work-sheet and full hearing were required before any final adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81701</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>