<?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>2009 (3) TMI 754 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126077</link>
    <description>A classification demand cannot be sustained on a ground not proposed in the show-cause notice, because the assessee must receive an effective opportunity to meet the basis of the proposed reassessment. Here, the adjudication proceeded under Chapter 28 even though the notices alleged a different tariff heading, so the demand was held unsustainable on that basis and the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the dispute was remitted for fresh adjudication after a reasonable hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:46:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 754 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126077</link>
      <description>A classification demand cannot be sustained on a ground not proposed in the show-cause notice, because the assessee must receive an effective opportunity to meet the basis of the proposed reassessment. Here, the adjudication proceeded under Chapter 28 even though the notices alleged a different tariff heading, so the demand was held unsustainable on that basis and the matter required reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the dispute was remitted for fresh adjudication after a reasonable hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126077</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>