Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1999 (6) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der per : Lajja Ram, Member (T)]. -  In this appeal, filed by M/s. B.S. Patel, Yeotmal, the matter relates to the classification of goods, which were sold under the brand name of (1) Chetan Pandharpuri Zarda; and (2) Chetan Lawangi Zarda. Before 1-3-1986, the appellants were paying central excise duty on these products as branded chewing tobacco. On introduction of the new Central Excise T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....und claim of Rs. 37,170.90 for the period 19-2-1987 to 23-6-1987. The main ground of filing of the refund claim was that the goods cleared by them would continue to remain as un-manufactured tobacco. The claim was not substantiated. A show cause notice was issued and the matter was decided by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, who observed that the assessee had filed refund claim on 28-7-1....