<?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>2023 (10) TMI 350 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444127</link>
    <description>The Tribunal classified the combipack under sub-heading 38089191, agreeing with the department&#039;s assessment that the essential character of the product is that of the Mosquito Repellant Refill (MRR). The penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 was revoked due to the absence of intent to evade duty. The demand, including interest, was upheld partially, resulting in the appeals being partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2023 08:29:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=728579" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 350 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444127</link>
      <description>The Tribunal classified the combipack under sub-heading 38089191, agreeing with the department&#039;s assessment that the essential character of the product is that of the Mosquito Repellant Refill (MRR). The penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 was revoked due to the absence of intent to evade duty. The demand, including interest, was upheld partially, resulting in the appeals being partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>