<?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 936 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367200</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the previous order. The imported Shea Butter was correctly classified under Customs Tariff heading No. 1515 9091, meeting the edible and refined grade criteria required for exemption under Notification No. 12/2012. The appellant&#039;s argument that Shea Butter is primarily for edible purposes was supported by supplier certification and historical use in confectionery. The department failed to provide evidence refuting the edible grade classification, and the absence of end-use conditions in the notification meant that even if the consignment was used in cosmetics, the concessional rate could not be denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 15:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 936 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367200</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the previous order. The imported Shea Butter was correctly classified under Customs Tariff heading No. 1515 9091, meeting the edible and refined grade criteria required for exemption under Notification No. 12/2012. The appellant&#039;s argument that Shea Butter is primarily for edible purposes was supported by supplier certification and historical use in confectionery. The department failed to provide evidence refuting the edible grade classification, and the absence of end-use conditions in the notification meant that even if the consignment was used in cosmetics, the concessional rate could not be denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367200</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>