<?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>2000 (11) TMI 643 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96278</link>
    <description>Composite goods made of aluminium foil sandwiched between plastic layers were classified by reference to the component giving the essential character. Applying earlier Tribunal reasoning, the essential character was found to be aluminium foil, so classification under Heading 3920 as plastic film was rejected. The goods were therefore classifiable under Heading 7607 as aluminium foil, and the duty demand based on Heading 3920 was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 15:36:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133337" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 643 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96278</link>
      <description>Composite goods made of aluminium foil sandwiched between plastic layers were classified by reference to the component giving the essential character. Applying earlier Tribunal reasoning, the essential character was found to be aluminium foil, so classification under Heading 3920 as plastic film was rejected. The goods were therefore classifiable under Heading 7607 as aluminium foil, and the duty demand based on Heading 3920 was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96278</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>