<?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>2008 (2) TMI 773 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123774</link>
    <description>Microcrystalline cellulose powder classification turned on whether an earlier final order favouring sub-heading 2942.00 could be displaced by later departmental material. The prior classification had attained finality, and the Chief Chemist&#039;s opinion was insufficient to override the tribunal&#039;s earlier findings. The analysis reiterates that Chapter 39 applies only where the product is cellulose or a chemical derivative in primary form, which the department did not establish on the evidence. It also applies the settled approach that tariff classification must follow the product&#039;s trade understanding and the record, not technical description alone. The assessee&#039;s classification was maintained and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:28:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 773 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123774</link>
      <description>Microcrystalline cellulose powder classification turned on whether an earlier final order favouring sub-heading 2942.00 could be displaced by later departmental material. The prior classification had attained finality, and the Chief Chemist&#039;s opinion was insufficient to override the tribunal&#039;s earlier findings. The analysis reiterates that Chapter 39 applies only where the product is cellulose or a chemical derivative in primary form, which the department did not establish on the evidence. It also applies the settled approach that tariff classification must follow the product&#039;s trade understanding and the record, not technical description alone. The assessee&#039;s classification was maintained and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123774</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>