<?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>1994 (11) TMI 218 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83779</link>
    <description>Processed tipping paper was discussed on a tariff classification dispute between Heading 48.13 and Heading 48.11, with the key question being whether the Motley printing process merely prepared the paper for use or changed its commercial identity. The note emphasises that end-use alone is not conclusive and that trade understanding, technical literature, and HSN notes may be relevant to classification. It also records that, where the existing material does not establish the effect of processing or the product&#039;s identity after treatment, the classification issue should be resolved on technical and trade evidence rather than assumption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Jul 2011 16:44:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120923" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (11) TMI 218 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83779</link>
      <description>Processed tipping paper was discussed on a tariff classification dispute between Heading 48.13 and Heading 48.11, with the key question being whether the Motley printing process merely prepared the paper for use or changed its commercial identity. The note emphasises that end-use alone is not conclusive and that trade understanding, technical literature, and HSN notes may be relevant to classification. It also records that, where the existing material does not establish the effect of processing or the product&#039;s identity after treatment, the classification issue should be resolved on technical and trade evidence rather than assumption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>