<?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>2011 (3) TMI 245 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203922</link>
    <description>Tariff classification could not be finally determined because the foundational facts were not examined, including whether the embroidery work was carried out with powered vertical type automatic shuttle embroidery machines and whether the activity fell within the relevant tariff entry or the residuary sub-heading. As the Tribunal and lower authorities had not decided those core factual questions, the matter was set aside and remitted for de novo consideration of all issues arising for decision. The governing principle stated is that where essential facts needed for classification have not been found by the fact-finding authorities, the proper course is fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177471" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 245 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203922</link>
      <description>Tariff classification could not be finally determined because the foundational facts were not examined, including whether the embroidery work was carried out with powered vertical type automatic shuttle embroidery machines and whether the activity fell within the relevant tariff entry or the residuary sub-heading. As the Tribunal and lower authorities had not decided those core factual questions, the matter was set aside and remitted for de novo consideration of all issues arising for decision. The governing principle stated is that where essential facts needed for classification have not been found by the fact-finding authorities, the proper course is fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>