<?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>2006 (2) TMI 558 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119433</link>
    <description>Classification of the products as Ayurvedic veterinary medicaments or animal food supplements required fresh examination on the existing evidentiary record, including literature, board circulars and cited precedents. The Tribunal noted that the department had earlier accepted the products under the animal food supplement heading, while the impugned order reclassified them as veterinary medicaments. As the assessee&#039;s supporting material could materially affect the classification, the dispute was remanded for de novo adjudication on merits. The question of limitation was also directed to be reconsidered in the fresh proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:01:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 558 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119433</link>
      <description>Classification of the products as Ayurvedic veterinary medicaments or animal food supplements required fresh examination on the existing evidentiary record, including literature, board circulars and cited precedents. The Tribunal noted that the department had earlier accepted the products under the animal food supplement heading, while the impugned order reclassified them as veterinary medicaments. As the assessee&#039;s supporting material could materially affect the classification, the dispute was remanded for de novo adjudication on merits. The question of limitation was also directed to be reconsidered in the fresh proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119433</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>