<?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 (4) TMI 1101 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212145</link>
    <description>Pizza manufactured with chicken topping was held not classifiable under Chapter 16 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate decisions that such pizza does not fall within sub-heading 1601.10 or Chapter 16, and that the presence of toppings and the manner of packing do not justify classification under that chapter. The classification controversy was treated as settled against the Revenue&#039;s view, leaving the assessee&#039;s claimed Chapter 19 classification intact.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1101 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212145</link>
      <description>Pizza manufactured with chicken topping was held not classifiable under Chapter 16 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate decisions that such pizza does not fall within sub-heading 1601.10 or Chapter 16, and that the presence of toppings and the manner of packing do not justify classification under that chapter. The classification controversy was treated as settled against the Revenue&#039;s view, leaving the assessee&#039;s claimed Chapter 19 classification intact.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>