<?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>1983 (12) TMI 288 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166797</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the classification of &quot;EMULSIFIER T&quot; as excisable goods under Item No. 15AA of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, emphasizing that its nature as an emulsifier determined its liability for excise duty, regardless of its intended use or marketing status. The appeal was rejected, affirming that the product&#039;s classification as excisable goods was based on its nature and inclusion in the tariff schedule, rather than its production process or purpose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 03 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2014 12:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (12) TMI 288 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166797</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the classification of &quot;EMULSIFIER T&quot; as excisable goods under Item No. 15AA of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, emphasizing that its nature as an emulsifier determined its liability for excise duty, regardless of its intended use or marketing status. The appeal was rejected, affirming that the product&#039;s classification as excisable goods was based on its nature and inclusion in the tariff schedule, rather than its production process or purpose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 03 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166797</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>