https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3227 The Supreme Court reaffirmed that tariff classification turns on the product's true character and the specific heading that fits it, rather than on the manufacturing process or raw material used. On the facts, the assessee's product was treated as yarn, not synthetic monofilament, because the dispute related to filament yarn and the plant output exceeded the dimensional limit relevant to the monofilament heading. Chapter Heading 54.04 was therefore held to apply, while Chapter Heading 54.06 was held inapplicable. The departmental challenge to the assessee's classification failed, and the assessee's tariff treatment was sustained. en-us Wed, 09 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3227 The Supreme Court reaffirmed that tariff classification turns on the product's true character and the specific heading that fits it, rather than on the manufacturing process or raw material used. On the facts, the assessee's product was treated as yarn, not synthetic monofilament, because the dispute related to filament yarn and the plant output exceeded the dimensional limit relevant to the monofilament heading. Chapter Heading 54.04 was therefore held to apply, while Chapter Heading 54.06 was held inapplicable. The departmental challenge to the assessee's classification failed, and the assessee's tariff treatment was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3227