https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84439 Thiram was examined for additional duty classification under the Central Excise Tariff by reference to its real nature and predominant use. The revenue's material did not conclusively establish that the imported product matched the rubber accelerator described in the texts, while the record showed it was described and treated as an insecticide, fell within the Insecticides Act, 1968 definition, appeared under the import policy heading for insecticides and pesticides, and was imported against a pesticide end-use licence. In the absence of satisfactory evidence that its predominant use was as a rubber processing chemical, the residuary classification under Item 68 was appropriate. en-us Thu, 17 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:55:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84439 Thiram was examined for additional duty classification under the Central Excise Tariff by reference to its real nature and predominant use. The revenue's material did not conclusively establish that the imported product matched the rubber accelerator described in the texts, while the record showed it was described and treated as an insecticide, fell within the Insecticides Act, 1968 definition, appeared under the import policy heading for insecticides and pesticides, and was imported against a pesticide end-use licence. In the absence of satisfactory evidence that its predominant use was as a rubber processing chemical, the residuary classification under Item 68 was appropriate. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84439