https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245863 The Tribunal overturned the adjudication order, ruling in favor of the appellant. The appellant's goods were wrongly classified under Tariff Sub-Heading 3909 50 00 instead of Heading 39.21, leading to an unjust demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty. The failure to consider the Board Circular No.10/1989, which clarified the proper classification based on product shape, rendered the duty demand and penalty unwarranted. The Tribunal found the adjudication order unsustainable, quashed it, and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of correctly applying legal circulars in classification disputes. en-us Tue, 04 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245863 The Tribunal overturned the adjudication order, ruling in favor of the appellant. The appellant's goods were wrongly classified under Tariff Sub-Heading 3909 50 00 instead of Heading 39.21, leading to an unjust demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty. The failure to consider the Board Circular No.10/1989, which clarified the proper classification based on product shape, rendered the duty demand and penalty unwarranted. The Tribunal found the adjudication order unsustainable, quashed it, and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of correctly applying legal circulars in classification disputes. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245863