Classifier - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: classifier Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 576 results (0.011 seconds)Vikas Engineering Associates Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT219TriDel
..... collectrorate wherein the adjudicating authority in the case of stanley switchgear products goregaun bombay had classified the bbdc with copper strips under chapter sub heading no 8536 90 he had ..... lightening arresters surge suppressors potential transformers etc in the circumstances they appear to be properly classifiable under sub heading no 8538 00 as parts suitable for use solely or principally .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSusumo Engineering Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT617TriDel
..... conclusion that the product susumo dumper mahabali 1300 is a light dumper and is correctly classifiable under subheading 8704 00 3 shri m h patil learned advocate appearing for the appellants ..... are totally different from dumpers and these certificates were not considered by the authority in classifying the item he said that much was made out on advertisement in determining the classification .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTi.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-31-1995
Reported in: (2000)(0)ELT00TriDel
..... box usable for packing cigarettes he therefore held that slides and shells were complete articles classifiable under sub heading 4818 13 being aggrieved by the order passed by the assistant ..... 86 seeking classification of printed shells for packing cigarettes and gaywrapper manufactured by them as classifiable under sub heading 4919 90 as other articles of printing industry attracting nil rate of .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNaturelle Health Products Pvt. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-1995
Reported in: (1996)(81)ELT578TriDel
..... have been manufactured under licence for ayurvedic drugs he has held that these cannot be classifiable as ayurvedic medicament for the reasons that synthetic ingredients have been used as manufacture ..... are ayur vedic medicines insofar as ingredients are concerned 11 the products have been classified by the drug central authorities as patent or proprietary ayurvedic medicines under section 3 .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTGarden Silk Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT580TriDel
..... the specific description in chapter heading 54 03 and therefore the same product cannot be classified under a residuary heading i e central excise tariff chapter heading 56 06 that interpretative ..... held the appellants have been manufacturing the products even from 1977 and the department admittedly classified those products under tariff item 26 aa ii later the question of classification was referred .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJaypee Forges Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-21-1995
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT49TriDel
..... the forgings had acquired the essential character of motor vehicles parts and therefore were classifiable under central excise tariff chapter heading 87 that the appellants were supplying forgings and ..... the provision of interpretative rule 2 a the product manufactured by the appellants was classifiable under get sub heading 8708 00 for proper appreciation of these contentions tariff description .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCollector of Central Excise Vs. Eswarana and Sons Engg. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1995
Reported in: (1995)LC19Tri(Delhi)
..... proceedings held that brass hexagonal connection nut and the box spanner handles are correctly classifiable under tariff item 52 and tariff item 51 a respectively and accordingly confirmed the ..... authorised representative of the respondents company submitted that both the authorities below erred in classifying the box spanner handle under tariff item 51a i of central excise tariff elaborating .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTParry'S Confectionery Ltd. Vs. Collector Of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-27-1995
Reported in: (1995)(78)ELT623TriDel
..... 1985 alleging that chocolate eclairs manufactured by them containing more than 3 5 chocolate was classifiable under tariff item 1a it was stated that the appellants had been suppressing facts regarding ..... manufactured by the appellants had remained unchanged he added that in 1969 when the department classified chocolate eclairs under tariff item 1a ii as chocolate the appellants had contested the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSikka Heat Treatment Centre Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-24-1995
Reported in: (1996)(81)ELT628TriDel
..... central excise tariff of elastic rail clips the appellants herein have claimed these goods as classifiable under 26aa ia central excise tariff covering bars rods etc and other rolled forged or ..... v k industries supra may require reconsideration as the tribunal while rendering the two judgments classifying the rail clips under tariff item 68 cet had not considered the supreme court judgment .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTHamdard (Wakf) Laboratories Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-10-1995
Reported in: (1995)LC80Tri(Delhi)
..... products or the food preparations include beverage base and that non alcoholic beverage bases are classifiable under heading no 21 07 of the customs cooperation council nomenclature cccn in the case ..... under amended notification which covered the latter item in the present case the appellants had classified their product sharbat rooh afza under sub heading 2107 91 as edible preparations not elsewhere .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial