<?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>1997 (4) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86777</link>
    <description>Bias cutting of hand-bleached cotton fabric, followed by gumming, chemical soaking, drying and conversion into tapes, was treated as only one step in the manufacture of electrical tapes, not as manufacture of cotton fabrics. The process therefore did not bring the material within Tariff Item 19(1)(b), because the relevant commodity was the final electrical tape product falling under Tariff Item 68. On that basis, no further duty was chargeable under Tariff Item 19(1)(b).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 13:33:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86777</link>
      <description>Bias cutting of hand-bleached cotton fabric, followed by gumming, chemical soaking, drying and conversion into tapes, was treated as only one step in the manufacture of electrical tapes, not as manufacture of cotton fabrics. The process therefore did not bring the material within Tariff Item 19(1)(b), because the relevant commodity was the final electrical tape product falling under Tariff Item 68. On that basis, no further duty was chargeable under Tariff Item 19(1)(b).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>