<?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>2004 (4) TMI 419 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112973</link>
    <description>Laboratory testing and surrounding documentary evidence established that the zinc sulphate cleared by the assessee conformed to the prescribed Indian Standard for agricultural grade zinc sulphate heptahydrate. The revenue laboratory reported compliance with the specification and zinc content above the minimum required for agricultural grade, while supporting records showed the goods were described as ISI-mark agricultural grade material and sold to agricultural co-operatives and farmers&#039; co-operatives. On that total evidence, the contrary classification in the adjudication order could not stand, and the goods qualified for exemption under Notification No. 40/85.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 11:00:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149989" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 419 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112973</link>
      <description>Laboratory testing and surrounding documentary evidence established that the zinc sulphate cleared by the assessee conformed to the prescribed Indian Standard for agricultural grade zinc sulphate heptahydrate. The revenue laboratory reported compliance with the specification and zinc content above the minimum required for agricultural grade, while supporting records showed the goods were described as ISI-mark agricultural grade material and sold to agricultural co-operatives and farmers&#039; co-operatives. On that total evidence, the contrary classification in the adjudication order could not stand, and the goods qualified for exemption under Notification No. 40/85.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>