<?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>2002 (11) TMI 496 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107106</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of Iron Oxide Powder, Graphite Powder, Colloidal Graphite Dry/Water Base, and Fire Cement Powder is discussed with reference to product composition, commercial identity, and claimed exemption notifications. Graphite Powder was treated as a distinct commercial product classifiable under the graphite heading, Colloidal Graphite Dry/Water Base was covered by Chapter 38, and Fire Cement Powder was not found to warrant interference with the lower authority&#039;s classification. The text also notes that Iron Oxide Powder required further factual testing on impurities before final confirmation. It further explains that where the show cause notice, final classification, and provisional assessment issues do not align, duty and penalty quantification must be reconsidered in de novo proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:44:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 496 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107106</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of Iron Oxide Powder, Graphite Powder, Colloidal Graphite Dry/Water Base, and Fire Cement Powder is discussed with reference to product composition, commercial identity, and claimed exemption notifications. Graphite Powder was treated as a distinct commercial product classifiable under the graphite heading, Colloidal Graphite Dry/Water Base was covered by Chapter 38, and Fire Cement Powder was not found to warrant interference with the lower authority&#039;s classification. The text also notes that Iron Oxide Powder required further factual testing on impurities before final confirmation. It further explains that where the show cause notice, final classification, and provisional assessment issues do not align, duty and penalty quantification must be reconsidered in de novo proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107106</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>