https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50705 Classification of the disputed products turned on whether they were animal feed supplements under Heading 2302 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, or goods of a different tariff description. The classification was sustained because the materials on record, including HSN notes, trade parlance, dealer affidavits, expert opinions, and evidence of use, supported the finding that the products were premixes used exclusively for animal feeding and not medicaments. The record also showed that some items were not manufactured by the respondent, some were repacked imported goods, and certain items had already been treated as animal feed in earlier orders. The Revenue failed to displace this evidence or show any basis to disturb the classification. en-us Thu, 07 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:03:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50705 Classification of the disputed products turned on whether they were animal feed supplements under Heading 2302 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, or goods of a different tariff description. The classification was sustained because the materials on record, including HSN notes, trade parlance, dealer affidavits, expert opinions, and evidence of use, supported the finding that the products were premixes used exclusively for animal feeding and not medicaments. The record also showed that some items were not manufactured by the respondent, some were repacked imported goods, and certain items had already been treated as animal feed in earlier orders. The Revenue failed to displace this evidence or show any basis to disturb the classification. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50705