https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93426 Plastic goods manufactured as gutter fittings were analysed by distinguishing gutters, treated as open channels, from pipes, treated as enclosed except at the ends. The classification under Heading 3925.19 was rejected because the impugned view was unsupported by evidence and the accepted distinction in standard specifications and earlier Tribunal decisions favoured treatment as pipe fittings under Heading 3917.00. Note 11 to Chapter 39 also made Heading 3925 inapplicable where the goods were already covered by an earlier heading, so articles falling within Heading 3917 could not be shifted to Heading 3925. The duty demand based on the impugned classification was therefore unsustainable. en-us Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:34:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93426 Plastic goods manufactured as gutter fittings were analysed by distinguishing gutters, treated as open channels, from pipes, treated as enclosed except at the ends. The classification under Heading 3925.19 was rejected because the impugned view was unsupported by evidence and the accepted distinction in standard specifications and earlier Tribunal decisions favoured treatment as pipe fittings under Heading 3917.00. Note 11 to Chapter 39 also made Heading 3925 inapplicable where the goods were already covered by an earlier heading, so articles falling within Heading 3917 could not be shifted to Heading 3925. The duty demand based on the impugned classification was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93426