<?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>2016 (4) TMI 600 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326486</link>
    <description>Chyawanprash Awaleha with Ashtawarg and Chyawanprash Awaleha Special were treated as Ayurvedic medicaments under CETH 30.03 because the wrappers described them as Ayurvedic medicine, carried a drug licence number, and indicated dosage, while the ingredients had been disclosed to Drug Control authorities and the manufacturing licence had been granted and extended on that basis. Their therapeutic and prophylactic utility brought them within Chapter 30, and Chapter Note 1(a) to Chapter 21 excluded products falling under Chapter 30. The fact that the goods could also operate as a tonic did not alter their essential medicinal character, and classification under CETH 21.07/21.08 as food supplement or health tonic was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2016 12:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424008" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 600 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326486</link>
      <description>Chyawanprash Awaleha with Ashtawarg and Chyawanprash Awaleha Special were treated as Ayurvedic medicaments under CETH 30.03 because the wrappers described them as Ayurvedic medicine, carried a drug licence number, and indicated dosage, while the ingredients had been disclosed to Drug Control authorities and the manufacturing licence had been granted and extended on that basis. Their therapeutic and prophylactic utility brought them within Chapter 30, and Chapter Note 1(a) to Chapter 21 excluded products falling under Chapter 30. The fact that the goods could also operate as a tonic did not alter their essential medicinal character, and classification under CETH 21.07/21.08 as food supplement or health tonic was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326486</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>