<?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>2024 (1) TMI 1450 - CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461313</link>
    <description>Roasted areca/betel nuts were classified under Tariff Item 2008 19 20 in Chapter 20 because roasting is a distinct process from the drying or limited heat treatment contemplated in Chapter 8, and the HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 2008 specifically include dry-roasted, oil-roasted or fat-roasted nuts, including areca or betel nuts. The advance ruling therefore treated Chapter 20 as the more specific entry for prepared nuts fit for immediate consumption and held the classification in favour of the applicant. The request for confidentiality was rejected because similar rulings on the same subject were already in the public domain.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 15:08:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=809797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 1450 - CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461313</link>
      <description>Roasted areca/betel nuts were classified under Tariff Item 2008 19 20 in Chapter 20 because roasting is a distinct process from the drying or limited heat treatment contemplated in Chapter 8, and the HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 2008 specifically include dry-roasted, oil-roasted or fat-roasted nuts, including areca or betel nuts. The advance ruling therefore treated Chapter 20 as the more specific entry for prepared nuts fit for immediate consumption and held the classification in favour of the applicant. The request for confidentiality was rejected because similar rulings on the same subject were already in the public domain.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>