<?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>1999 (8) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91962</link>
    <description>Glass moulds and plastic gaskets were classified under CET sub-heading 70.15 rather than Heading 84.80. An earlier classification determination involving the same assessee had been decided in favour of the Revenue and affirmed by the Supreme Court. That affirmed position governed the subsequent dispute, resulting in consequential duty liability and rejection of the claim for classification under Heading 84.80. The appeal failed and the Revenue&#039;s classification was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 12:03:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91962</link>
      <description>Glass moulds and plastic gaskets were classified under CET sub-heading 70.15 rather than Heading 84.80. An earlier classification determination involving the same assessee had been decided in favour of the Revenue and affirmed by the Supreme Court. That affirmed position governed the subsequent dispute, resulting in consequential duty liability and rejection of the claim for classification under Heading 84.80. The appeal failed and the Revenue&#039;s classification was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>