<?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 (1) TMI 260 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85977</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of Jhakara Tobacco was determined by the specific statutory definition in Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 21 read with Rule 1 of the Interpretative Rules, so it fell under Pan Masala in Heading 2106.11 and not chewing tobacco in Heading 2404.41. The broader tests of composite goods, essential character and trade parlance were rejected because the tariff itself supplied an express definition. The reclassification demand was confined to six months under section 11A, as the ingredients for the extended period were not established. Appeals arising from provisional assessment under Rule 9B were remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with the classification finding and after hearing the parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 13:16:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 260 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85977</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of Jhakara Tobacco was determined by the specific statutory definition in Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 21 read with Rule 1 of the Interpretative Rules, so it fell under Pan Masala in Heading 2106.11 and not chewing tobacco in Heading 2404.41. The broader tests of composite goods, essential character and trade parlance were rejected because the tariff itself supplied an express definition. The reclassification demand was confined to six months under section 11A, as the ingredients for the extended period were not established. Appeals arising from provisional assessment under Rule 9B were remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with the classification finding and after hearing the parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>