<?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>2010 (11) TMI 417 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205166</link>
    <description>Export goods qualify for Notification No. 133/2000-Cus. only if they satisfy the prescribed norms and retain the character of finished leather. On the record, the samples examined for the appellants and the department differed, and the later certificate found a total absence of protective coating, so the goods did not meet the finished leather standard. Note 3 to Public Notice No. 3/92-97 was held inapplicable because it addresses only deficiencies in the degree of mechanical operation, not a complete absence of protective coating. The goods also failed to meet the norm for Goat Nappa Upper, so the notification benefit was denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 417 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205166</link>
      <description>Export goods qualify for Notification No. 133/2000-Cus. only if they satisfy the prescribed norms and retain the character of finished leather. On the record, the samples examined for the appellants and the department differed, and the later certificate found a total absence of protective coating, so the goods did not meet the finished leather standard. Note 3 to Public Notice No. 3/92-97 was held inapplicable because it addresses only deficiencies in the degree of mechanical operation, not a complete absence of protective coating. The goods also failed to meet the norm for Goat Nappa Upper, so the notification benefit was denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>