<?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>2001 (9) TMI 341 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97276</link>
    <description>Insulating varnish based on polyester was classified by applying the general interpretative rules because the tariff created a conflict between classification by composition and by use, and the competing sub-headings were treated as equally specific. The later competing entry in numerical order controlled, so the goods fell under sub-heading 3208.40 as insulating varnish rather than sub-heading 3208.10 as varnish based on polyester.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:31:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134334" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 341 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97276</link>
      <description>Insulating varnish based on polyester was classified by applying the general interpretative rules because the tariff created a conflict between classification by composition and by use, and the competing sub-headings were treated as equally specific. The later competing entry in numerical order controlled, so the goods fell under sub-heading 3208.40 as insulating varnish rather than sub-heading 3208.10 as varnish based on polyester.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97276</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>