https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102514 Printed scarves that were identifiable as finished, ready-to-use articles were treated as falling under Heading 62.02 and therefore attracting nil duty. The demand for excise duty and the connected confiscation and penalties could not be sustained because neither the show cause notice nor the appeal specified the tariff heading or rate under which duty was proposed, leaving the basis of the demand unformed. The department also did not identify any alternative dutiable entry, while accepting that no duty would arise if Heading 62.02 applied. The classification in favour of nil duty was therefore maintained and the demand proceedings lacked legal foundation. en-us Fri, 05 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:51:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102514 Printed scarves that were identifiable as finished, ready-to-use articles were treated as falling under Heading 62.02 and therefore attracting nil duty. The demand for excise duty and the connected confiscation and penalties could not be sustained because neither the show cause notice nor the appeal specified the tariff heading or rate under which duty was proposed, leaving the basis of the demand unformed. The department also did not identify any alternative dutiable entry, while accepting that no duty would arise if Heading 62.02 applied. The classification in favour of nil duty was therefore maintained and the demand proceedings lacked legal foundation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 05 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102514