<?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 (12) TMI 416 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114714</link>
    <description>Silver vapour deposits collected from the metallising chamber were held classifiable as waste and scrap of precious metal under Heading 7101.80, not as pure silver under Heading 7101.60. The decisive factor was that the residue had been removed from the manufacturing process, lost its original form, and was sent for recovery and reconversion into silver wire, showing it was no longer fit for the same use as silver wire. Substantial purity or residual value did not prevent classification as scrap. The precedent on silver strips was distinguished because those remnants retained their original character. The departmental classification was upheld and the demand sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 13:02:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151713" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 416 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114714</link>
      <description>Silver vapour deposits collected from the metallising chamber were held classifiable as waste and scrap of precious metal under Heading 7101.80, not as pure silver under Heading 7101.60. The decisive factor was that the residue had been removed from the manufacturing process, lost its original form, and was sent for recovery and reconversion into silver wire, showing it was no longer fit for the same use as silver wire. Substantial purity or residual value did not prevent classification as scrap. The precedent on silver strips was distinguished because those remnants retained their original character. The departmental classification was upheld and the demand sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>