<?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 453 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96491</link>
    <description>Imported feed supplement was treated as similar to goods covered by an earlier Larger Bench ruling because it contained vitamins and other ingredients such as starch. The Commissioner was required to follow that binding precedent once cited, and failure to apply it rendered the classification order unsustainable. On that basis, the dispute over classification under Heading 2309.90 of the Customs Tariff Act and Heading 2302.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act was resolved in favour of the assessee, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:41:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 453 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96491</link>
      <description>Imported feed supplement was treated as similar to goods covered by an earlier Larger Bench ruling because it contained vitamins and other ingredients such as starch. The Commissioner was required to follow that binding precedent once cited, and failure to apply it rendered the classification order unsustainable. On that basis, the dispute over classification under Heading 2309.90 of the Customs Tariff Act and Heading 2302.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act was resolved in favour of the assessee, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96491</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>