<?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>1996 (10) TMI 137 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85408</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and remanded the case for reconsideration by the original authority due to violations of natural justice principles, particularly the denial of cross-examination of the Chief Chemist. The classification of liquid glucose under the Central Excise Tariff Act was deemed prejudiced by inconsistent test reports, necessitating a fresh review. The retrospective application of a Board&#039;s circular was rejected in favor of prospective application from a specified date. The majority opinion emphasized the importance of upholding natural justice, while a dissenting member suggested a lower pre-deposit amount but upheld the original classification decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:23:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 137 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85408</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and remanded the case for reconsideration by the original authority due to violations of natural justice principles, particularly the denial of cross-examination of the Chief Chemist. The classification of liquid glucose under the Central Excise Tariff Act was deemed prejudiced by inconsistent test reports, necessitating a fresh review. The retrospective application of a Board&#039;s circular was rejected in favor of prospective application from a specified date. The majority opinion emphasized the importance of upholding natural justice, while a dissenting member suggested a lower pre-deposit amount but upheld the original classification decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>