<?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>2018 (1) TMI 682 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353946</link>
    <description>Printed computer stationery, receipts and similar items were held to fall under Chapter 49 rather than Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff. The classification turned on the principle that where goods derive their essential character and utility from printing, and are used for a specific purpose, they are treated as printed matter instead of ordinary paper stationery. Reliance was placed on the Board&#039;s circular, the Chief Commissioner&#039;s clarification and consistent prior classifications, making the issue no longer res integra. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to the classification failed and the lower appellate authority&#039;s order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2018 14:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 682 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353946</link>
      <description>Printed computer stationery, receipts and similar items were held to fall under Chapter 49 rather than Chapter 48 of the Central Excise Tariff. The classification turned on the principle that where goods derive their essential character and utility from printing, and are used for a specific purpose, they are treated as printed matter instead of ordinary paper stationery. Reliance was placed on the Board&#039;s circular, the Chief Commissioner&#039;s clarification and consistent prior classifications, making the issue no longer res integra. The Revenue&#039;s challenge to the classification failed and the lower appellate authority&#039;s order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>