<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1186 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343448</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; classification of Magnesium Sulphate as an inorganic chemical compound under Chapter 28 of the Central Excise Tariff, rejecting the appellants&#039; claim for classification under Chapter 31 as &quot;other fertilizers.&quot; The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of essential fertilizing elements precludes classification under Chapter 31, as per relevant chapter notes. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that labeling the product as fertilizer or micronutrient, or being covered by the Fertilizer Control Order, does not determine its correct classification under the tariff. The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC, except for this modification, dismissing the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 17:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=469805" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1186 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343448</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; classification of Magnesium Sulphate as an inorganic chemical compound under Chapter 28 of the Central Excise Tariff, rejecting the appellants&#039; claim for classification under Chapter 31 as &quot;other fertilizers.&quot; The Tribunal emphasized that the absence of essential fertilizing elements precludes classification under Chapter 31, as per relevant chapter notes. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that labeling the product as fertilizer or micronutrient, or being covered by the Fertilizer Control Order, does not determine its correct classification under the tariff. The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed under Section 11AC, except for this modification, dismissing the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>