https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107402 Chemically treated wooden pieces used as cooling tower components were held not to be densified wood because the treatment had not been shown to produce increased density or hardness, or improved mechanical strength or resistance to chemical or electrical agencies. The evidence indicated only dipping in a copper chrome arsenic composition for anti-termite and anti-fungal protection, and the chemical examiner did not regard the sample as densified. On that basis, the goods did not fall under Heading 44.09 and were correctly classified as wood under Heading 44.03. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:08:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107402 Chemically treated wooden pieces used as cooling tower components were held not to be densified wood because the treatment had not been shown to produce increased density or hardness, or improved mechanical strength or resistance to chemical or electrical agencies. The evidence indicated only dipping in a copper chrome arsenic composition for anti-termite and anti-fungal protection, and the chemical examiner did not regard the sample as densified. On that basis, the goods did not fall under Heading 44.09 and were correctly classified as wood under Heading 44.03. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107402