<?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>2019 (5) TMI 1586 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380858</link>
    <description>Classification of imported textile goods was examined against Notification No. 36/2003-Cus, which applied only to goods under sub-heading 5407 61. The lower authorities had reclassified the goods under 5407 69, but the original Textile Committee report supported the importer&#039;s claim that the goods were fabric containing textured polyester filaments. A later departmental test report from the Deputy Chief Chemist, used to support reclassification, was not backed by the record and was contrary to the administrative guidance favouring reliance on the Textile Committee for the relevant textile test. The reclassification and denial of exemption were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 14:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=573221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1586 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380858</link>
      <description>Classification of imported textile goods was examined against Notification No. 36/2003-Cus, which applied only to goods under sub-heading 5407 61. The lower authorities had reclassified the goods under 5407 69, but the original Textile Committee report supported the importer&#039;s claim that the goods were fabric containing textured polyester filaments. A later departmental test report from the Deputy Chief Chemist, used to support reclassification, was not backed by the record and was contrary to the administrative guidance favouring reliance on the Textile Committee for the relevant textile test. The reclassification and denial of exemption were therefore unsustainable, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380858</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>