<?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>2005 (4) TMI 185 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54253</link>
    <description>Covered spandex yarn classification was remanded for de novo adjudication because the original authorities relied mainly on trade parlance and material from another manufacturer, without properly dealing with the undisputed SITRA certificate and other expert evidence. The appellate record was found insufficient for a final tariff classification decision, so the matter had to be reconsidered with independent application of mind. Penalty was also set aside because the dispute was an interpretative tariff classification issue turning on evidence and classification principles, making penalty inappropriate in the fresh proceedings. The adjudicating authority was directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law and natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:52:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 185 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54253</link>
      <description>Covered spandex yarn classification was remanded for de novo adjudication because the original authorities relied mainly on trade parlance and material from another manufacturer, without properly dealing with the undisputed SITRA certificate and other expert evidence. The appellate record was found insufficient for a final tariff classification decision, so the matter had to be reconsidered with independent application of mind. Penalty was also set aside because the dispute was an interpretative tariff classification issue turning on evidence and classification principles, making penalty inappropriate in the fresh proceedings. The adjudicating authority was directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law and natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>