<?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 (10) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92321</link>
    <description>A final adjudication on classification and exemption binds the parties and cannot be reopened in a later proceeding involving the same goods. The text states that the goods were classified under Heading 4816.00, and the attempt to reclassify them under sub-heading 4823.90 was rejected because the issue had already attained finality. It also records that the benefit of Notification No. 44/86 was unavailable on the same basis. Further, an administrative circular could not override the earlier Tribunal determination, and in any event it related to tele-printer rolls, not self-copy papers. The appeal therefore failed on both classification and exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:28:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92321</link>
      <description>A final adjudication on classification and exemption binds the parties and cannot be reopened in a later proceeding involving the same goods. The text states that the goods were classified under Heading 4816.00, and the attempt to reclassify them under sub-heading 4823.90 was rejected because the issue had already attained finality. It also records that the benefit of Notification No. 44/86 was unavailable on the same basis. Further, an administrative circular could not override the earlier Tribunal determination, and in any event it related to tele-printer rolls, not self-copy papers. The appeal therefore failed on both classification and exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92321</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>