<?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>2012 (9) TMI 341 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216533</link>
    <description>Fried rings made from rice, wheat and potato flour, sold as ready-to-eat snacks, were treated as food preparations under sub-heading 2108.99 rather than pasta under Heading 19.02. The product was considered commercially and functionally distinct from pasta because it was prepared from dry pellets, fried in oil, salted and flavoured, placing it in the category of namkeens. Prior classification of similar snack products under sub-heading 2108.99 supported that view, and no stay or reversal of that classification was shown. The goods were therefore held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 4/97-C.E., and the Revenue&#039;s challenge did not succeed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2012 17:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=189913" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 341 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216533</link>
      <description>Fried rings made from rice, wheat and potato flour, sold as ready-to-eat snacks, were treated as food preparations under sub-heading 2108.99 rather than pasta under Heading 19.02. The product was considered commercially and functionally distinct from pasta because it was prepared from dry pellets, fried in oil, salted and flavoured, placing it in the category of namkeens. Prior classification of similar snack products under sub-heading 2108.99 supported that view, and no stay or reversal of that classification was shown. The goods were therefore held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 4/97-C.E., and the Revenue&#039;s challenge did not succeed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216533</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>