https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94678 The appeal was partly allowed, confirming the classification of aluminium paint in a dual pack under CET Sub-heading 3208.90. Duty demands for the period from March to August 1992 were upheld, while demands for an earlier period were not sustained. The issue of reassessment of duty was remanded for redetermination, and the appellants were given the liberty to challenge the classification in future proceedings. en-us Mon, 03 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Dec 2011 10:15:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94678 The appeal was partly allowed, confirming the classification of aluminium paint in a dual pack under CET Sub-heading 3208.90. Duty demands for the period from March to August 1992 were upheld, while demands for an earlier period were not sustained. The issue of reassessment of duty was remanded for redetermination, and the appellants were given the liberty to challenge the classification in future proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94678