<?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>2002 (5) TMI 491 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102781</link>
    <description>Boiled or evaporated milk with about 80% moisture was held not to be concentrated (condensed) milk under Chapter sub-heading 0401.14 because it did not meet commercial or IS specifications, was cleared in empty drums without predetermined quantity, was not packed in unit containers, had a short shelf life, and was not marketed as condensed milk. Applying the settled classification principle that the tariff entry requires marketability and compliance with the unit-container and ordinarily intended for sale conditions, the revenue classification failed. The demand, related declaration requirements, and penalty were therefore not sustainable, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:17:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 491 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102781</link>
      <description>Boiled or evaporated milk with about 80% moisture was held not to be concentrated (condensed) milk under Chapter sub-heading 0401.14 because it did not meet commercial or IS specifications, was cleared in empty drums without predetermined quantity, was not packed in unit containers, had a short shelf life, and was not marketed as condensed milk. Applying the settled classification principle that the tariff entry requires marketability and compliance with the unit-container and ordinarily intended for sale conditions, the revenue classification failed. The demand, related declaration requirements, and penalty were therefore not sustainable, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>