<?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 603 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107348</link>
    <description>Classification of zinc dross and ash for tariff purposes turned on strict satisfaction of the tariff definition of zinc alloy. The chemical test report showed zinc with traces of iron and silicon, but it did not quantify the other elements or establish that zinc predominated by weight over each other element and that the other elements exceeded 2.5%, as required by Chapter 79, Note 1(b). On that evidence alone, classification under the zinc alloy heading could not be sustained. The goods were instead classifiable under sub-heading 2620.00 as ash and residues containing metals, and the differential duty demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 17:37:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144365" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 603 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107348</link>
      <description>Classification of zinc dross and ash for tariff purposes turned on strict satisfaction of the tariff definition of zinc alloy. The chemical test report showed zinc with traces of iron and silicon, but it did not quantify the other elements or establish that zinc predominated by weight over each other element and that the other elements exceeded 2.5%, as required by Chapter 79, Note 1(b). On that evidence alone, classification under the zinc alloy heading could not be sustained. The goods were instead classifiable under sub-heading 2620.00 as ash and residues containing metals, and the differential duty demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>