<?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>2017 (3) TMI 364 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339861</link>
    <description>Mixed waste arising from the manufacture of cotton dyed yarn and cotton blended yarn was classified by applying the predominance test for textile mixtures under the tariff notes for Chapters 50 to 55. Because the waste was not maintained separately and cotton predominated by weight over the other textile material, it was treated as falling under Chapter 52. On that basis, the waste was held not liable to duty, and the demand and penalties were not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2018 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460663" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 364 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339861</link>
      <description>Mixed waste arising from the manufacture of cotton dyed yarn and cotton blended yarn was classified by applying the predominance test for textile mixtures under the tariff notes for Chapters 50 to 55. Because the waste was not maintained separately and cotton predominated by weight over the other textile material, it was treated as falling under Chapter 52. On that basis, the waste was held not liable to duty, and the demand and penalties were not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>