<?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>2006 (12) TMI 24 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1183</link>
    <description>Tiger Balm was held to fall within Ayurvedic medicaments under CET sub-heading 3003.39 because its natural ingredients were found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts and the First Schedule to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Its classification did not change merely because it was sold under a proprietary formula or had an asserted Chinese traditional origin, since the relevant test remained whether its ingredients and therapeutic character answered to Ayurveda in common parlance. The Revenue bore the burden to displace the assessee&#039;s classification claim and failed to do so on the material relied upon, so the assessee&#039;s classification was affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 24 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1183</link>
      <description>Tiger Balm was held to fall within Ayurvedic medicaments under CET sub-heading 3003.39 because its natural ingredients were found in authoritative Ayurvedic texts and the First Schedule to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Its classification did not change merely because it was sold under a proprietary formula or had an asserted Chinese traditional origin, since the relevant test remained whether its ingredients and therapeutic character answered to Ayurveda in common parlance. The Revenue bore the burden to displace the assessee&#039;s classification claim and failed to do so on the material relied upon, so the assessee&#039;s classification was affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>