<?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>2000 (12) TMI 501 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96290</link>
    <description>The classification of Dant Manjan Lal turned on whether it was an Ayurvedic medicament under Chapter 30 or a tooth powder for oral hygiene under Chapter 33 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal followed its earlier view on the same product and found no reason to depart from that conclusion. It therefore accepted classification under Chapter 30 as an Ayurvedic medicament and rejected the Revenue&#039;s proposed Chapter 33 classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 16:26:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 501 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96290</link>
      <description>The classification of Dant Manjan Lal turned on whether it was an Ayurvedic medicament under Chapter 30 or a tooth powder for oral hygiene under Chapter 33 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal followed its earlier view on the same product and found no reason to depart from that conclusion. It therefore accepted classification under Chapter 30 as an Ayurvedic medicament and rejected the Revenue&#039;s proposed Chapter 33 classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96290</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>