<?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 1201 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209260</link>
    <description>Prickly heat powder is treated as classifiable under Chapter Heading 30.03 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 because the product matched an earlier Supreme Court ruling on the same classification question. That binding precedent settled the issue, leaving no basis for a contrary classification under Chapter Heading 34.03. On that footing, the Revenue&#039;s challenge fails, the assessee&#039;s position is accepted, and the demand and penalty are set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182712" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1201 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209260</link>
      <description>Prickly heat powder is treated as classifiable under Chapter Heading 30.03 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 because the product matched an earlier Supreme Court ruling on the same classification question. That binding precedent settled the issue, leaving no basis for a contrary classification under Chapter Heading 34.03. On that footing, the Revenue&#039;s challenge fails, the assessee&#039;s position is accepted, and the demand and penalty are set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209260</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>