<?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 (5) TMI 207 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91795</link>
    <description>Rubber Processing Oil was held not classifiable under sub-heading 2710.50 as furnace oil because the tariff entry required the hydrocarbon oil to be ordinarily used as furnace fuel, not merely to meet technical specifications. The material on record showed the product was not used as furnace oil and was in fact a speciality oil used in rubber processing. The earlier tariff position, which focused mainly on technical specifications, was distinguished from the later wording of the entry. Classification under sub-heading 2710.50 was rejected, and classification under sub-heading 2710.99 was sustained in favour of Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:37:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128856" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 207 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91795</link>
      <description>Rubber Processing Oil was held not classifiable under sub-heading 2710.50 as furnace oil because the tariff entry required the hydrocarbon oil to be ordinarily used as furnace fuel, not merely to meet technical specifications. The material on record showed the product was not used as furnace oil and was in fact a speciality oil used in rubber processing. The earlier tariff position, which focused mainly on technical specifications, was distinguished from the later wording of the entry. Classification under sub-heading 2710.50 was rejected, and classification under sub-heading 2710.99 was sustained in favour of Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91795</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>