<?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 (11) TMI 1 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333983</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the classification of LED Panel Indicators, maintaining the classification under Heading 85312000 as decided by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal held that the department could not introduce a new classification under a different heading at the Tribunal stage and limited the appeal to the conflicting tariff headings between 85318000 and 85312000. The judgment was pronounced on 31/08/2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333983</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding the classification of LED Panel Indicators, maintaining the classification under Heading 85312000 as decided by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal held that the department could not introduce a new classification under a different heading at the Tribunal stage and limited the appeal to the conflicting tariff headings between 85318000 and 85312000. The judgment was pronounced on 31/08/2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>