<?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>1993 (7) TMI 169 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82640</link>
    <description>Polyester film was entitled to customs exemption for additional duty because binding precedent treated plastic films as distinct from plastic sheets or plastic foils under the notification wording. The earlier ratio controlled classification, and the denial of benefit on a different classification was inconsistent with that settled interpretation. The exemption therefore applied, and the refusal to grant relief was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:59:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119785" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (7) TMI 169 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82640</link>
      <description>Polyester film was entitled to customs exemption for additional duty because binding precedent treated plastic films as distinct from plastic sheets or plastic foils under the notification wording. The earlier ratio controlled classification, and the denial of benefit on a different classification was inconsistent with that settled interpretation. The exemption therefore applied, and the refusal to grant relief was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>