<?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>2003 (1) TMI 365 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107149</link>
    <description>The electrical item &quot;shunt&quot; was held to fall specifically within Entry 85.33 of the Central Excise Tariff. On that footing, the appellate authority should not have disturbed the classification originally adopted by the Assistant Commissioner. The classification under Entry 85.33 was therefore upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:54:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144168" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 365 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107149</link>
      <description>The electrical item &quot;shunt&quot; was held to fall specifically within Entry 85.33 of the Central Excise Tariff. On that footing, the appellate authority should not have disturbed the classification originally adopted by the Assistant Commissioner. The classification under Entry 85.33 was therefore upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107149</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>