<?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>1983 (8) TMI 275 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166647</link>
    <description>Imported insulating papers made of paper backing and plastic film were treated as composite goods for tariff classification. For basic customs duty, the expression &quot;composite paper or paper-board&quot; was limited to articles made from different layers of paper or paper-board, so the goods did not fall under that heading. Applying Interpretative Rule 3(b), the plastic component gave the goods their essential character, bringing them under Heading 39.01/06. For countervailing duty, the same composite nature did not fit Item 17(2), and the residuary Item 68 applied instead. The classification issue was therefore accepted for countervailing duty but not for basic customs duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:28:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367686" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (8) TMI 275 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166647</link>
      <description>Imported insulating papers made of paper backing and plastic film were treated as composite goods for tariff classification. For basic customs duty, the expression &quot;composite paper or paper-board&quot; was limited to articles made from different layers of paper or paper-board, so the goods did not fall under that heading. Applying Interpretative Rule 3(b), the plastic component gave the goods their essential character, bringing them under Heading 39.01/06. For countervailing duty, the same composite nature did not fit Item 17(2), and the residuary Item 68 applied instead. The classification issue was therefore accepted for countervailing duty but not for basic customs duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>