<?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 (10) TMI 1081 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107203</link>
    <description>Classification disputes over maltodextrin and maltodex turned on the description in the assessee&#039;s certificate and classification list, and on whether the revenue relied on material effectively disclosed for rebuttal. The demand on maltodextrin was found unsustainable because the record supported the assessee&#039;s declared description and the adverse inference could not stand, so the demand failed on merits and limitation. The maltodex classification and short levy were not upheld because the decisive test report had not been properly put to the assessee, and the connected issues of valuation, Modvat credit, comparable goods and non-marketability required fresh consideration in de novo proceedings with a full hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:25:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 1081 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107203</link>
      <description>Classification disputes over maltodextrin and maltodex turned on the description in the assessee&#039;s certificate and classification list, and on whether the revenue relied on material effectively disclosed for rebuttal. The demand on maltodextrin was found unsustainable because the record supported the assessee&#039;s declared description and the adverse inference could not stand, so the demand failed on merits and limitation. The maltodex classification and short levy were not upheld because the decisive test report had not been properly put to the assessee, and the connected issues of valuation, Modvat credit, comparable goods and non-marketability required fresh consideration in de novo proceedings with a full hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>