https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339447 Tariff classification depended on whether the carpet products had a ground fabric together with a pile or looped surface, because Sub-heading Note 2(B)(ii) of Section XI applied only to goods meeting that factual condition. On the facts found, the products lacked that essential combination, so the note could not be used to exclude the ground fabric or justify classification under the higher-duty entry. The classification under sub-heading 5703.20 was therefore maintained and the competing claim for sub-heading 5703.90 failed. en-us Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jan 2018 15:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339447 Tariff classification depended on whether the carpet products had a ground fabric together with a pile or looped surface, because Sub-heading Note 2(B)(ii) of Section XI applied only to goods meeting that factual condition. On the facts found, the products lacked that essential combination, so the note could not be used to exclude the ground fabric or justify classification under the higher-duty entry. The classification under sub-heading 5703.20 was therefore maintained and the competing claim for sub-heading 5703.90 failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339447