<?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 (7) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92155</link>
    <description>End cuttings of bead wire rings coated with rubber were classified by reference to their dominant and essential constituent. Because the goods consisted of steel wire with only a rubber coating, the product was to be classified according to the predominant material and not the surface coating alone. On that basis, the end cuttings were correctly treated as steel scrap under Heading 72.04 rather than rubber scrap under Heading 40.04.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:48:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (7) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92155</link>
      <description>End cuttings of bead wire rings coated with rubber were classified by reference to their dominant and essential constituent. Because the goods consisted of steel wire with only a rubber coating, the product was to be classified according to the predominant material and not the surface coating alone. On that basis, the end cuttings were correctly treated as steel scrap under Heading 72.04 rather than rubber scrap under Heading 40.04.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>