<?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>1996 (12) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86073</link>
    <description>Tyre cord warp sheets dipped in resorcinol solution were treated as fabrics for excise classification because tyre cord warp fabrics fall within the broad expression &quot;all varieties of fabrics&quot; in Item 22. The decisive point was that the dipping and drying process produced a commercially distinct product amounting to manufacture, while the predominance of ingredients was not controlling where the tariff entry covered impregnated or coated base fabrics. On that reasoning, the goods were classifiable under Tariff Item 22 rather than Tariff Item 16A(2), and the Revenue&#039;s classification view was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:44:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (12) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86073</link>
      <description>Tyre cord warp sheets dipped in resorcinol solution were treated as fabrics for excise classification because tyre cord warp fabrics fall within the broad expression &quot;all varieties of fabrics&quot; in Item 22. The decisive point was that the dipping and drying process produced a commercially distinct product amounting to manufacture, while the predominance of ingredients was not controlling where the tariff entry covered impregnated or coated base fabrics. On that reasoning, the goods were classifiable under Tariff Item 22 rather than Tariff Item 16A(2), and the Revenue&#039;s classification view was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86073</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>