<?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 (8) TMI 318 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364846</link>
    <description>Needles with a vertical punch were treated as components rather than complete atraumatic needled sutures because they could not be used for suturing until combined with suture thread. On that factual basis, the goods were classifiable as parts or accessories of goods under Heading 9018, and the exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE was available. The demand, interest and penalties therefore became unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=529678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 318 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364846</link>
      <description>Needles with a vertical punch were treated as components rather than complete atraumatic needled sutures because they could not be used for suturing until combined with suture thread. On that factual basis, the goods were classifiable as parts or accessories of goods under Heading 9018, and the exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE was available. The demand, interest and penalties therefore became unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364846</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>