<?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 (9) TMI 993 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176496</link>
    <description>Semi-finished spectacle lenses were examined for classification under heading 9001.50.00 and for eligibility to exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The dispute was treated as covered by earlier final orders involving the same product, and that prior reasoning was applied to the present appeals. On that basis, the claimed classification was not accepted and the exemption benefit for spectacle lenses was denied, resulting in dismissal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:59:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 993 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176496</link>
      <description>Semi-finished spectacle lenses were examined for classification under heading 9001.50.00 and for eligibility to exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The dispute was treated as covered by earlier final orders involving the same product, and that prior reasoning was applied to the present appeals. On that basis, the claimed classification was not accepted and the exemption benefit for spectacle lenses was denied, resulting in dismissal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>