<?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 (5) TMI 371 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94414</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined that the product &#039;KIT-KAT&#039; should be classified under Heading 19.05 of the tariff, rejecting the Commissioner&#039;s classification under Heading 18.03. As a result, the appellant was not liable for penalty, and the appeal was allowed with the impugned order set aside, granting consequential relief. The issue of limitation on notices for recovery of duty was not addressed due to the classification outcome.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 12:59:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 371 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94414</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined that the product &#039;KIT-KAT&#039; should be classified under Heading 19.05 of the tariff, rejecting the Commissioner&#039;s classification under Heading 18.03. As a result, the appellant was not liable for penalty, and the appeal was allowed with the impugned order set aside, granting consequential relief. The issue of limitation on notices for recovery of duty was not addressed due to the classification outcome.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94414</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>