<?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>2004 (7) TMI 139 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53001</link>
    <description>Salinomycin 350 Mycelia, described as a residue of antibiotic manufacture and as a polyether antibiotic with anti-coccidial properties, was treated as classifiable under sub-heading 2941.90 rather than as an animal feed pre-mix under sub-heading 2302.00 because it was not shown to be animal feed and Chapter 29 classification did not depend on chemical definition alone. The HSN note exclusion for Heading 23.09 applied to the antibiotic-manufacturing residue. For valuation, the assessable value was upheld on the declared per-kilogram basis because the cost data reflected actual batch expenditure and there was no evidence supporting a mandatory 50% reduction on the basis of active mass potency.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 10:00:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91478" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 139 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53001</link>
      <description>Salinomycin 350 Mycelia, described as a residue of antibiotic manufacture and as a polyether antibiotic with anti-coccidial properties, was treated as classifiable under sub-heading 2941.90 rather than as an animal feed pre-mix under sub-heading 2302.00 because it was not shown to be animal feed and Chapter 29 classification did not depend on chemical definition alone. The HSN note exclusion for Heading 23.09 applied to the antibiotic-manufacturing residue. For valuation, the assessable value was upheld on the declared per-kilogram basis because the cost data reflected actual batch expenditure and there was no evidence supporting a mandatory 50% reduction on the basis of active mass potency.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>