<?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 (3) TMI 1590 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197194</link>
    <description>Goods cleared by the assessee were treated as classifiable under Tariff Entry 8528 rather than Tariff Entry 8529 under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The classification was upheld because the Commissioner and Tribunal relied on the relevant departmental circulars and the applicable statute, and the determination was treated as a finding of fact supported by the record. No basis was found to interfere with those concurrent findings, and the levy of duty challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:41:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501712" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1590 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197194</link>
      <description>Goods cleared by the assessee were treated as classifiable under Tariff Entry 8528 rather than Tariff Entry 8529 under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The classification was upheld because the Commissioner and Tribunal relied on the relevant departmental circulars and the applicable statute, and the determination was treated as a finding of fact supported by the record. No basis was found to interfere with those concurrent findings, and the levy of duty challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>