<?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>1997 (2) TMI 149 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45462</link>
    <description>Classification of the product was accepted under Item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff because the department acknowledged that the assessee had acted on the 1977 Tariff Advice, and earlier judgments and orders had treated the product under the same residuary entry. On that basis, the Court set aside the impugned order, noting that the entry had been superseded in 1985, and directed consequential relief to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 16:36:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83989" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 149 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45462</link>
      <description>Classification of the product was accepted under Item No. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff because the department acknowledged that the assessee had acted on the 1977 Tariff Advice, and earlier judgments and orders had treated the product under the same residuary entry. On that basis, the Court set aside the impugned order, noting that the entry had been superseded in 1985, and directed consequential relief to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45462</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>