<?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>2015 (10) TMI 1310 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266035</link>
    <description>The Tribunal classified the goods manufactured by the appellant as &quot;ice cream&quot; under heading 2105 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, despite the presence of vegetable fat. Relying on the common parlance understanding and the Supreme Court precedent, the Tribunal held that the goods were commonly perceived as ice cream, granting a stay from the recovery of duty, interest, and penalty until the appeal was resolved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=401974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1310 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266035</link>
      <description>The Tribunal classified the goods manufactured by the appellant as &quot;ice cream&quot; under heading 2105 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, despite the presence of vegetable fat. Relying on the common parlance understanding and the Supreme Court precedent, the Tribunal held that the goods were commonly perceived as ice cream, granting a stay from the recovery of duty, interest, and penalty until the appeal was resolved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>