<?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>2000 (2) TMI 132 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49765</link>
    <description>Product classification turned on whether Vital-Z fell under Chapter 17 or as a miscellaneous edible preparation under Heading 2107.91. Its composition of dextrose, sucrose, zinc sulphate, ascorbic acid, colour, flavour and excipients was found materially similar to products earlier classified under Chapter 17. Cited precedents and the Board&#039;s clarification on a similar product were treated as applicable, and the attempt to distinguish the product was rejected because its essential composition matched the comparable Chapter 17 products. Classification under Chapter 17 was therefore upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:28:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88245" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 132 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49765</link>
      <description>Product classification turned on whether Vital-Z fell under Chapter 17 or as a miscellaneous edible preparation under Heading 2107.91. Its composition of dextrose, sucrose, zinc sulphate, ascorbic acid, colour, flavour and excipients was found materially similar to products earlier classified under Chapter 17. Cited precedents and the Board&#039;s clarification on a similar product were treated as applicable, and the attempt to distinguish the product was rejected because its essential composition matched the comparable Chapter 17 products. Classification under Chapter 17 was therefore upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49765</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>