<?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>1995 (10) TMI 147 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84862</link>
    <description>Conflicting observations on the availability and examination of samples in a classification dispute over parts of agricultural implements required fresh adjudication rather than final determination on merits. Because both sides sought a de novo decision and a proper opportunity of hearing, the impugned classification order was set aside. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise was directed to reconsider the matter after inspection of the disputed parts and with assistance from the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:04:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 147 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84862</link>
      <description>Conflicting observations on the availability and examination of samples in a classification dispute over parts of agricultural implements required fresh adjudication rather than final determination on merits. Because both sides sought a de novo decision and a proper opportunity of hearing, the impugned classification order was set aside. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise was directed to reconsider the matter after inspection of the disputed parts and with assistance from the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84862</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>