<?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>Dispute Over Tapioca Starch Classification Under Excise Rules Raises Questions on Transparency and Procedural Fairness in Testing.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38303</link>
    <description>Classification of goods - Tapioca Starches, ‘Native&#039; as well as &#039;Modified&#039; - It is not understood that when the samples were drawn by Revenue in the presence of the appellant and sent to the chemical examiner for testing, then why the results of the same were not provided to the assesse. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2018 07:50:58 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2018 07:50:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512364" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Dispute Over Tapioca Starch Classification Under Excise Rules Raises Questions on Transparency and Procedural Fairness in Testing.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38303</link>
      <description>Classification of goods - Tapioca Starches, ‘Native&#039; as well as &#039;Modified&#039; - It is not understood that when the samples were drawn by Revenue in the presence of the appellant and sent to the chemical examiner for testing, then why the results of the same were not provided to the assesse. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2018 07:50:58 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=38303</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>