<?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>2001 (6) TMI 338 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96411</link>
    <description>Pharmaceutical enzyme blends meeting IP/BP standards were considered for classification either as medicaments under Chapter 30 or as prepared enzymes under Chapter 35. Their manufacture involved blending enzymes with excipients such as lactose and calcium phosphate, and the record did not conclusively establish direct prophylactic or therapeutic use. Compliance with drug law, the drug licence, and the end-use or further processing by buyers were relevant to characterising the goods. The classification issue was remanded for fresh adjudication after the appellant was allowed to produce supporting material and the cited circulars and precedent were to be examined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 15:18:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133470" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 338 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96411</link>
      <description>Pharmaceutical enzyme blends meeting IP/BP standards were considered for classification either as medicaments under Chapter 30 or as prepared enzymes under Chapter 35. Their manufacture involved blending enzymes with excipients such as lactose and calcium phosphate, and the record did not conclusively establish direct prophylactic or therapeutic use. Compliance with drug law, the drug licence, and the end-use or further processing by buyers were relevant to characterising the goods. The classification issue was remanded for fresh adjudication after the appellant was allowed to produce supporting material and the cited circulars and precedent were to be examined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>