<?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>2004 (1) TMI 526 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111423</link>
    <description>Musical instrument bags made of polyester or cotton fabrics, even with ancillary materials such as velvet, foam, leather, plywood or satin cloth, were treated as made-up articles under Product Group 89 for DEPB purposes. The tariff notes on Section XI and Chapter 63 supported the view that textile products in finished form and ready for use, including bags under Heading 63.05, are made-ups. The absence of restrictive words such as &quot;exclusively&quot; or &quot;only&quot; in the DEPB entry was material, so the mixed composition did not disqualify the goods. The CBEC circular relied on by the Revenue was held inapplicable, and DEPB benefit was held admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:56:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148439" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 526 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111423</link>
      <description>Musical instrument bags made of polyester or cotton fabrics, even with ancillary materials such as velvet, foam, leather, plywood or satin cloth, were treated as made-up articles under Product Group 89 for DEPB purposes. The tariff notes on Section XI and Chapter 63 supported the view that textile products in finished form and ready for use, including bags under Heading 63.05, are made-ups. The absence of restrictive words such as &quot;exclusively&quot; or &quot;only&quot; in the DEPB entry was material, so the mixed composition did not disqualify the goods. The CBEC circular relied on by the Revenue was held inapplicable, and DEPB benefit was held admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111423</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>