<?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 (7) TMI 771 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124424</link>
    <description>Coconut oil packed in retail containers and sold under a hair-care brand name did not become hair oil for classification purposes. Classification had to follow the tariff description, Section Notes, Chapter Notes and HSN material, and mere repacking, branding or retail sale form was insufficient to move the product from Chapter 1513 to Chapter 3305 without additives, hair-use indications or specialized presentation. Because the product remained coconut oil, the excise duty demand based on the higher classification failed, and the related interest and penalties also could not survive. The impugned orders were set aside and the fiscal and penal consequences were vacated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 771 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124424</link>
      <description>Coconut oil packed in retail containers and sold under a hair-care brand name did not become hair oil for classification purposes. Classification had to follow the tariff description, Section Notes, Chapter Notes and HSN material, and mere repacking, branding or retail sale form was insufficient to move the product from Chapter 1513 to Chapter 3305 without additives, hair-use indications or specialized presentation. Because the product remained coconut oil, the excise duty demand based on the higher classification failed, and the related interest and penalties also could not survive. The impugned orders were set aside and the fiscal and penal consequences were vacated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>