<?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 (3) TMI 498 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107689</link>
    <description>Tarpaulin made from PP/HDPE fabrics was treated as classifiable under Heading 39.26 of the Central Excise Tariff rather than Heading 63.06, following the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on HDPE tarpaulin. The duty demand was required to be recomputed on a cum-duty basis because the sale price had already included duty. Penalty for wrongful classification and clearance without proper duty was upheld in principle, but the amount was reduced on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:24:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144706" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 498 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107689</link>
      <description>Tarpaulin made from PP/HDPE fabrics was treated as classifiable under Heading 39.26 of the Central Excise Tariff rather than Heading 63.06, following the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on HDPE tarpaulin. The duty demand was required to be recomputed on a cum-duty basis because the sale price had already included duty. Penalty for wrongful classification and clearance without proper duty was upheld in principle, but the amount was reduced on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>