<?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 (10) TMI 1788 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285289</link>
    <description>Classification of the impugned bakery and food products was determined by composition, essential character and HSN guidance: cake decors were held not to fall in Heading 1901 because colours and flavours gave them their dominant character; cake concentrates were classified under Heading 0404 due to their milk protein and milk solids content; ready-to-use mixes fell under Heading 2106; and bakery mixes, biscuit mixes and bread improvers were classified under Headings 1102 and 1108, as applicable, rather than Heading 1901. The extended limitation period was not invocable because the assessee had disclosed the nature, ingredients and use of the products and no suppression was shown; the related demand, interest and penalties therefore could not stand. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:14:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=599474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1788 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285289</link>
      <description>Classification of the impugned bakery and food products was determined by composition, essential character and HSN guidance: cake decors were held not to fall in Heading 1901 because colours and flavours gave them their dominant character; cake concentrates were classified under Heading 0404 due to their milk protein and milk solids content; ready-to-use mixes fell under Heading 2106; and bakery mixes, biscuit mixes and bread improvers were classified under Headings 1102 and 1108, as applicable, rather than Heading 1901. The extended limitation period was not invocable because the assessee had disclosed the nature, ingredients and use of the products and no suppression was shown; the related demand, interest and penalties therefore could not stand. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>