<?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>1993 (3) TMI 219 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82530</link>
    <description>An approved Central Excise classification list may be reopened under Rule 173B(5) where the dispute concerns the correct classification or rate of duty, especially if fresh facts, a correct tariff interpretation, or other duty-relevant reasons emerge. The majority view treated such modification as permissible because there is no estoppel against law and the exercise is not necessarily an impermissible review. The dissent considered reopening unwarranted on the facts and would have left the prior approval undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:59:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119675" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (3) TMI 219 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82530</link>
      <description>An approved Central Excise classification list may be reopened under Rule 173B(5) where the dispute concerns the correct classification or rate of duty, especially if fresh facts, a correct tariff interpretation, or other duty-relevant reasons emerge. The majority view treated such modification as permissible because there is no estoppel against law and the exercise is not necessarily an impermissible review. The dissent considered reopening unwarranted on the facts and would have left the prior approval undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>