<?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 233 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82917</link>
    <description>Powdering of tobacco was examined for duty purposes under Chapter 24, and the text notes that the chapter note did not treat powdering as manufacture of manufactured tobacco. It also records that, under the earlier tariff, tobacco powder had been treated as unmanufactured tobacco, and that duty had already been paid on the final product Gul. On that basis, stay of the duty demand was granted during pendency of the appeals, and the matters were transferred to the Special Bench.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 11:43:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120062" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (3) TMI 233 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82917</link>
      <description>Powdering of tobacco was examined for duty purposes under Chapter 24, and the text notes that the chapter note did not treat powdering as manufacture of manufactured tobacco. It also records that, under the earlier tariff, tobacco powder had been treated as unmanufactured tobacco, and that duty had already been paid on the final product Gul. On that basis, stay of the duty demand was granted during pendency of the appeals, and the matters were transferred to the Special Bench.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>