<?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>2011 (2) TMI 397 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205645</link>
    <description>Imported nylon filament yarn described in the Bills of Entry as deniers in multiples of 210 fell within the notification entry attracting the higher concessional CVD rate applicable to nylon filament yarn of 210 deniers or in multiples thereof. The appellate interpretation that &quot;multiples&quot; qualified filament yarn rather than denierage was found incorrect, and the description of the goods supported application of the specific tariff category. On that basis, a strong prima facie case was made out for stay, and operation of the impugned order was stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 397 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205645</link>
      <description>Imported nylon filament yarn described in the Bills of Entry as deniers in multiples of 210 fell within the notification entry attracting the higher concessional CVD rate applicable to nylon filament yarn of 210 deniers or in multiples thereof. The appellate interpretation that &quot;multiples&quot; qualified filament yarn rather than denierage was found incorrect, and the description of the goods supported application of the specific tariff category. On that basis, a strong prima facie case was made out for stay, and operation of the impugned order was stayed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>