<?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>1987 (7) TMI 444 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74716</link>
    <description>PVC-laminated jute fabric was held classifiable as laminated textile fabrics under Item 22-B rather than as jute manufactures under Item 22-A because the later tariff entry specifically covered textile fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated. The earlier exemption notifications did not govern the later tariff position, having been issued before Item 22-B was introduced and amended. The classification in favour of the Revenue was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:29:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (7) TMI 444 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74716</link>
      <description>PVC-laminated jute fabric was held classifiable as laminated textile fabrics under Item 22-B rather than as jute manufactures under Item 22-A because the later tariff entry specifically covered textile fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated. The earlier exemption notifications did not govern the later tariff position, having been issued before Item 22-B was introduced and amended. The classification in favour of the Revenue was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74716</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>