<?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>CESTAT ruled fruit juice-based drinks should be classified under Tariff Heading 2202 9020.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78846</link>
    <description>CESTAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed the classification of aerated drinks and fruit pulp or fruit juice-based drinks under different brand names. The issue was whether to classify them under Tariff Heading 2202 9020 or Chapter Sub-heading 22021020 for the period April 2011 to August 2012. The Tribunal referred to a previous case and a decision by a Larger Bench, concluding that the products in question are classifiable under Tariff Item 2202 90 20 as &quot;fruit pulp or fruit juice-based drinks.&quot; The Tribunal disagreed with a previous decision cited by the Commissioner. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the Appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:38:51 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:38:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=757778" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CESTAT ruled fruit juice-based drinks should be classified under Tariff Heading 2202 9020.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78846</link>
      <description>CESTAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed the classification of aerated drinks and fruit pulp or fruit juice-based drinks under different brand names. The issue was whether to classify them under Tariff Heading 2202 9020 or Chapter Sub-heading 22021020 for the period April 2011 to August 2012. The Tribunal referred to a previous case and a decision by a Larger Bench, concluding that the products in question are classifiable under Tariff Item 2202 90 20 as &quot;fruit pulp or fruit juice-based drinks.&quot; The Tribunal disagreed with a previous decision cited by the Commissioner. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the Appellant.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:38:51 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78846</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>