<?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 (4) TMI 970 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211008</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of maize starch turned on whether the goods were proven to be modified starch under Chapter Heading 35.05 or native starch under Chapter Heading 11.03. The analysis stressed that classification must be determined from the goods&#039; actual physical and chemical properties, including viscosity, gelatinization temperature and solubility, and that a departmental chemical opinion alone is insufficient without independent testing and proper evaluation of contrary technical evidence. On the material discussed, the products were not proved to be modified starch, making classification under Chapter Heading 35.05 unsustainable and rendering the related duty demands and penalties untenable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 970 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211008</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of maize starch turned on whether the goods were proven to be modified starch under Chapter Heading 35.05 or native starch under Chapter Heading 11.03. The analysis stressed that classification must be determined from the goods&#039; actual physical and chemical properties, including viscosity, gelatinization temperature and solubility, and that a departmental chemical opinion alone is insufficient without independent testing and proper evaluation of contrary technical evidence. On the material discussed, the products were not proved to be modified starch, making classification under Chapter Heading 35.05 unsustainable and rendering the related duty demands and penalties untenable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>