<?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>1999 (6) TMI 89 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91472</link>
    <description>Copper hot dip tinned wire was held to remain copper wire because the tinning process was used only to prevent oxidation and did not give the wire insulation properties. Heading 74.05 covered copper wire, while Heading 85.44 applied only to insulated electric conductors. On that basis, the goods were correctly classified under Heading 74.05 and not under Heading 85.44.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:33:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 89 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91472</link>
      <description>Copper hot dip tinned wire was held to remain copper wire because the tinning process was used only to prevent oxidation and did not give the wire insulation properties. Heading 74.05 covered copper wire, while Heading 85.44 applied only to insulated electric conductors. On that basis, the goods were correctly classified under Heading 74.05 and not under Heading 85.44.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>