<?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 (6) TMI 568 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114463</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of mica-based goods had to begin with objective identification of the goods before applying the relevant heading and interpretative rules. Since the record relied only on sample invoices, did not cover all clearances, and contained no finding on whether the goods were composite products or pure mica products, the proper classification could not be determined on the existing material. Chapter 68 covered mica products not elsewhere specified, while Chapter Note (g) excluded electrical insulators and insulating parts falling in Chapter 85. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh factual verification and a new classification decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 18:15:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151462" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 568 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114463</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of mica-based goods had to begin with objective identification of the goods before applying the relevant heading and interpretative rules. Since the record relied only on sample invoices, did not cover all clearances, and contained no finding on whether the goods were composite products or pure mica products, the proper classification could not be determined on the existing material. Chapter 68 covered mica products not elsewhere specified, while Chapter Note (g) excluded electrical insulators and insulating parts falling in Chapter 85. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh factual verification and a new classification decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>