<?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>2015 (4) TMI 931 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259050</link>
    <description>Classification of rerolled steel turned on whether the process produced cold rolled flat products under heading 7211 or merely remained a hot rolled product process. Applying the HSN Explanatory Notes for Chapter 72, the record required technical evidence of cold rolling characteristics such as grain deformation, surface change and dimensional tolerances. No microscopic examination or other testing established those features, and reliance on buyer identity or the rolling stands used was insufficient. The assessee&#039;s explanation of only very light reduction, without significant change in thickness, was not disproved, and such light cold rolling or a pinch pass did not change the character of the finished hot rolled product. The classification, duty demand, interest and penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 931 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259050</link>
      <description>Classification of rerolled steel turned on whether the process produced cold rolled flat products under heading 7211 or merely remained a hot rolled product process. Applying the HSN Explanatory Notes for Chapter 72, the record required technical evidence of cold rolling characteristics such as grain deformation, surface change and dimensional tolerances. No microscopic examination or other testing established those features, and reliance on buyer identity or the rolling stands used was insufficient. The assessee&#039;s explanation of only very light reduction, without significant change in thickness, was not disproved, and such light cold rolling or a pinch pass did not change the character of the finished hot rolled product. The classification, duty demand, interest and penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>