<?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>1990 (11) TMI 265 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81025</link>
    <description>An imported antifoam product described as a dimethyl polysiloxane emulsion was classified under Heading 39.01/06 because the product literature, invoice and purchase order showed silicone in emulsion form, which Chapter Note 3(a) to Chapter 39 includes within that heading. Prior decisions distinguished silicone in its primary form from compounded preparations, and the material on record did not show any more specific heading outside Chapter 39. The residuary Heading 38.01/19(1) could not be preferred merely because the goods functioned as a defoamer. Classification under Heading 39.01/06 was therefore upheld and the claim for Chapter 38 classification was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:28:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118170" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (11) TMI 265 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81025</link>
      <description>An imported antifoam product described as a dimethyl polysiloxane emulsion was classified under Heading 39.01/06 because the product literature, invoice and purchase order showed silicone in emulsion form, which Chapter Note 3(a) to Chapter 39 includes within that heading. Prior decisions distinguished silicone in its primary form from compounded preparations, and the material on record did not show any more specific heading outside Chapter 39. The residuary Heading 38.01/19(1) could not be preferred merely because the goods functioned as a defoamer. Classification under Heading 39.01/06 was therefore upheld and the claim for Chapter 38 classification was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>