<?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 (5) TMI 901 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171801</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, determining that the repacked coconut oil should be classified under Chapter 15 as edible oil, not Chapter 33 as hair oil. Consequently, duty demands were vacated, and appeals by the Revenue were dismissed. The decision relied on judicial precedents and the clear labeling of the product as edible grade coconut oil.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Apr 2017 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 901 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171801</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, determining that the repacked coconut oil should be classified under Chapter 15 as edible oil, not Chapter 33 as hair oil. Consequently, duty demands were vacated, and appeals by the Revenue were dismissed. The decision relied on judicial precedents and the clear labeling of the product as edible grade coconut oil.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>