<?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 (7) TMI 603 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109914</link>
    <description>Embroidery processed on base fabrics was held not to fall within Note 8 to Chapter 58 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, because the tariff scheme, chapter wording and common parlance treated embroidery as distinct from fabrics. In view of the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on the same issue and a connected matter already remanded for fresh determination, the impugned demand and penalty order was set aside and the matter sent back to the jurisdictional Commissioner for reconsideration. The appellants were permitted to raise all other pleas, including limitation, before the Commissioner, and the controversy was left for decision in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:44:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146930" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 603 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109914</link>
      <description>Embroidery processed on base fabrics was held not to fall within Note 8 to Chapter 58 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, because the tariff scheme, chapter wording and common parlance treated embroidery as distinct from fabrics. In view of the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on the same issue and a connected matter already remanded for fresh determination, the impugned demand and penalty order was set aside and the matter sent back to the jurisdictional Commissioner for reconsideration. The appellants were permitted to raise all other pleas, including limitation, before the Commissioner, and the controversy was left for decision in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109914</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>