https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89837 Imported goods were examined for tariff classification as zinc ash or zinc dross, and the chemical test report showing 85.7% free metallic zinc, together with the material description, supported treatment as zinc ash under Heading 26.20. The appellate authority had extended the benefit of doubt to the importer on the basis of the report and specifications, and that classification was not disturbed because the Revenue failed to show error in the finding. The duty position was therefore sustained, and any refund was stated to be subject to the law of unjust enrichment. en-us Fri, 21 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:47:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89837 Imported goods were examined for tariff classification as zinc ash or zinc dross, and the chemical test report showing 85.7% free metallic zinc, together with the material description, supported treatment as zinc ash under Heading 26.20. The appellate authority had extended the benefit of doubt to the importer on the basis of the report and specifications, and that classification was not disturbed because the Revenue failed to show error in the finding. The duty position was therefore sustained, and any refund was stated to be subject to the law of unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89837