<?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 538 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99548</link>
    <description>Blister packing of bulk capsules into retail packs was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, but duty liability could not be sustained without first examining the applicability of Notification No. 214/86-C.E. and the related factual issues. The record also left unresolved whether the blister packs were returned to the first manufacturer, whether testing and control samples were maintained under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, and whether final carton packing occurred at another unit. As these matters were material to exemption and duty liability, the demand and penalties were set aside for de novo adjudication on remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:40:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 538 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99548</link>
      <description>Blister packing of bulk capsules into retail packs was treated as manufacture under Chapter Note 5 to Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, but duty liability could not be sustained without first examining the applicability of Notification No. 214/86-C.E. and the related factual issues. The record also left unresolved whether the blister packs were returned to the first manufacturer, whether testing and control samples were maintained under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, and whether final carton packing occurred at another unit. As these matters were material to exemption and duty liability, the demand and penalties were set aside for de novo adjudication on remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>