<?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>1995 (1) TMI 142 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83895</link>
    <description>Non-woven felt fabrics produced by needle punching were treated as capable of classification as man-made fabrics because the concept of textiles was not confined to woven material. The material&#039;s manufacture and textile character supported inclusion under Tariff Item 22. The same goods were also held classifiable as floor coverings under Tariff Item 22G because their physical attributes and actual use as carpeting in motor vehicles brought them within the tariff entry, including its explanation covering carpeting with floor-covering characteristics. Classification under Item 22G was therefore upheld, and the challenge to the demand failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:18:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 142 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83895</link>
      <description>Non-woven felt fabrics produced by needle punching were treated as capable of classification as man-made fabrics because the concept of textiles was not confined to woven material. The material&#039;s manufacture and textile character supported inclusion under Tariff Item 22. The same goods were also held classifiable as floor coverings under Tariff Item 22G because their physical attributes and actual use as carpeting in motor vehicles brought them within the tariff entry, including its explanation covering carpeting with floor-covering characteristics. Classification under Item 22G was therefore upheld, and the challenge to the demand failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>