<?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>2014 (12) TMI 1028 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254685</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of homeopathy medicines, regarding the classification of &#039;Aswini Homeo Arnica Hair Oil&#039; as a medicament rather than a cosmetic product. The tribunal found the presence of homeopathic medicaments, absence of perfume, and specific usage indications supported the classification as a medicament. Additionally, the tribunal granted a waiver of pre-deposit due to the appellant&#039;s financial difficulties and the unique circumstances of the case, providing relief during the proceedings with a stay against recovery for 180 days.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 06:54:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372300" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 1028 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254685</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of homeopathy medicines, regarding the classification of &#039;Aswini Homeo Arnica Hair Oil&#039; as a medicament rather than a cosmetic product. The tribunal found the presence of homeopathic medicaments, absence of perfume, and specific usage indications supported the classification as a medicament. Additionally, the tribunal granted a waiver of pre-deposit due to the appellant&#039;s financial difficulties and the unique circumstances of the case, providing relief during the proceedings with a stay against recovery for 180 days.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>