<?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>2008 (7) TMI 224 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32053</link>
    <description>Mixtures of spices remain classifiable under Chapter 09 where they are predominantly composed of spices, retain the essential character of spices, and are commonly understood in the market as masalas. The Tribunal found that the products other than Jiralu contained mainly spices with only minor additional ingredients, and the Revenue failed to show that those additions changed their character into mixed condiments, mixed seasonings or other edible preparations under Chapter 21. The classification was also supported by the market-understanding approach, the Board&#039;s circular on similar food mixes, and the need for uniform treatment of identical products. Accordingly, the challenge to Chapter 09 classification failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 224 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32053</link>
      <description>Mixtures of spices remain classifiable under Chapter 09 where they are predominantly composed of spices, retain the essential character of spices, and are commonly understood in the market as masalas. The Tribunal found that the products other than Jiralu contained mainly spices with only minor additional ingredients, and the Revenue failed to show that those additions changed their character into mixed condiments, mixed seasonings or other edible preparations under Chapter 21. The classification was also supported by the market-understanding approach, the Board&#039;s circular on similar food mixes, and the need for uniform treatment of identical products. Accordingly, the challenge to Chapter 09 classification failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>