<?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>2005 (6) TMI 379 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115640</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the reclassification of EHT transformer, Line Driver transformer, and SMPS transformer under Heading 8504.00 instead of sub-heading 8529.00, as per Note 2(a) of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff. The Revenue&#039;s argument for correct classification was supported by the specific heading for transformers and Section 11A provisions for duty recovery. The appeal was rejected, confirming the Additional Collector&#039;s order for differential duty payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 16:33:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152639" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 379 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115640</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the reclassification of EHT transformer, Line Driver transformer, and SMPS transformer under Heading 8504.00 instead of sub-heading 8529.00, as per Note 2(a) of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff. The Revenue&#039;s argument for correct classification was supported by the specific heading for transformers and Section 11A provisions for duty recovery. The appeal was rejected, confirming the Additional Collector&#039;s order for differential duty payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>