<?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 (9) TMI 892 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367156</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the impugned fabrics should not be classified under CETH 5903 based on retest results and CBEC circulars. The lower authorities failed to comply with remand directions, leading to improper classification. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 892 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367156</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the impugned fabrics should not be classified under CETH 5903 based on retest results and CBEC circulars. The lower authorities failed to comply with remand directions, leading to improper classification. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential benefits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>