https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106595 Separate chemically defined compounds were held outside Chapter 32 by Note 1, so chromium sulphate could not be classified there and was to fall under the more specific sulphate heading. The chromium oxides also failed to qualify under the pigment entry in Chapter 32 because they were not shown to be products of a kind used as luminophores, and the tariff notes supported exclusion from Heading 32.06. The departmental classification was therefore upheld and the appellant's claim for Chapter 32 classification was rejected. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:17:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106595 Separate chemically defined compounds were held outside Chapter 32 by Note 1, so chromium sulphate could not be classified there and was to fall under the more specific sulphate heading. The chromium oxides also failed to qualify under the pigment entry in Chapter 32 because they were not shown to be products of a kind used as luminophores, and the tariff notes supported exclusion from Heading 32.06. The departmental classification was therefore upheld and the appellant's claim for Chapter 32 classification was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106595