<?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 185 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84001</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of a carbon black emulsion or dispersion depends on its proven technical composition and the relevant chapter notes. The product was described as being in aqueous medium, so the exclusion for pigments dispersed in non-aqueous media did not apply, and classification under Chapter 38 could not be sustained merely because the specific Chapter 32 sub-headings had not been fully examined. Because the record lacked adequate technical material, including the chemical test report, and the product description and manufacturing details were inconsistent, fresh factual verification was required before a final classification could be fixed. The matter was therefore remitted for de novo examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:04:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 185 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84001</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of a carbon black emulsion or dispersion depends on its proven technical composition and the relevant chapter notes. The product was described as being in aqueous medium, so the exclusion for pigments dispersed in non-aqueous media did not apply, and classification under Chapter 38 could not be sustained merely because the specific Chapter 32 sub-headings had not been fully examined. Because the record lacked adequate technical material, including the chemical test report, and the product description and manufacturing details were inconsistent, fresh factual verification was required before a final classification could be fixed. The matter was therefore remitted for de novo examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>