<?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>2008 (9) TMI 680 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124672</link>
    <description>Imported investment powder used for investment casting of jewel moulds was held to be classifiable under Chapter 3816 as a refractory composition rather than under Chapter 2520.20 as plaster. The decisive factor was the product&#039;s composition and essential character: silica was the predominant component, while gypsum acted only as a binder. Chapter 2520.20 applies to gypsum and plasters derived from gypsum, whereas Chapter 3816 covers refractory cements, mortars, concretes and similar silica-based refractory compositions used for dental or jewel moulds. On this basis, the goods were correctly treated as refractory material, in favour of Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2012 10:51:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161616" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 680 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124672</link>
      <description>Imported investment powder used for investment casting of jewel moulds was held to be classifiable under Chapter 3816 as a refractory composition rather than under Chapter 2520.20 as plaster. The decisive factor was the product&#039;s composition and essential character: silica was the predominant component, while gypsum acted only as a binder. Chapter 2520.20 applies to gypsum and plasters derived from gypsum, whereas Chapter 3816 covers refractory cements, mortars, concretes and similar silica-based refractory compositions used for dental or jewel moulds. On this basis, the goods were correctly treated as refractory material, in favour of Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124672</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>