<?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 (12) TMI 1260 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188086</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for a review of the appellant&#039;s claim that the appropriate classification for the product was under CTH 2106. The decision was based on the product&#039;s composition not aligning with the classification under CTH 1901 and the need for fresh consideration due to the department&#039;s previous classification of the same product under CTH 21.06 in a subsequent import.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 09:39:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 1260 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188086</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for a review of the appellant&#039;s claim that the appropriate classification for the product was under CTH 2106. The decision was based on the product&#039;s composition not aligning with the classification under CTH 1901 and the need for fresh consideration due to the department&#039;s previous classification of the same product under CTH 21.06 in a subsequent import.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188086</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>