https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80495 The appellant successfully argued for the reclassification of the product "rexin" under Tariff Item 68 instead of Tariff Item 19(III) due to the predominance of cotton content in the fabric. The Tribunal determined that the product did not fall under Tariff Item 19(III) and should be classified under Tariff Item 68. Regarding the refund claim, the Tribunal held that a letter sent to the Collector of Central Excise was not a formal refund claim but a representation for reclassification. The appellant was granted a refund for the excess duty paid in the six months preceding the date of the formal refund claim on 26th February 1986. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:38:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80495 The appellant successfully argued for the reclassification of the product "rexin" under Tariff Item 68 instead of Tariff Item 19(III) due to the predominance of cotton content in the fabric. The Tribunal determined that the product did not fall under Tariff Item 19(III) and should be classified under Tariff Item 68. Regarding the refund claim, the Tribunal held that a letter sent to the Collector of Central Excise was not a formal refund claim but a representation for reclassification. The appellant was granted a refund for the excess duty paid in the six months preceding the date of the formal refund claim on 26th February 1986. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 08 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80495