<?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 (7) TMI 1178 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273915</link>
    <description>Classification of hair oil and massage oil as Ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter 30 was sustained where the Tribunal found the matter already covered by an earlier decision involving the same product line and the Commissioner (Appeals) had examined the ingredients and supporting case law. Although similar authorities on hair oils and herbal preparations had reached different results, the Department produced no fresh or convincing material to dislodge the earlier view. On that basis, the products remained classifiable as Ayurvedic medicaments, and the Department&#039;s challenge to the assessee&#039;s classification succeeded in no disturbance to the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2018 05:42:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=527595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1178 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273915</link>
      <description>Classification of hair oil and massage oil as Ayurvedic medicaments under Chapter 30 was sustained where the Tribunal found the matter already covered by an earlier decision involving the same product line and the Commissioner (Appeals) had examined the ingredients and supporting case law. Although similar authorities on hair oils and herbal preparations had reached different results, the Department produced no fresh or convincing material to dislodge the earlier view. On that basis, the products remained classifiable as Ayurvedic medicaments, and the Department&#039;s challenge to the assessee&#039;s classification succeeded in no disturbance to the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273915</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>