https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296341 Textile fabric impregnated with plastic coating that could not be seen with the naked eye was held outside Heading 59.03, and Heading 59.01 was treated as limited to buckram and similar stiffened textile fabrics, not all stiffened fabrics. The departmental circular dated 13 June 1986 was treated as binding on excise authorities and required interlining cloth that did not fit those headings to be classified under Chapters 50 to 55 according to the predominance of textile material by weight. The classification order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment under the relevant tariff entries. en-us Mon, 10 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jul 2021 16:24:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296341 Textile fabric impregnated with plastic coating that could not be seen with the naked eye was held outside Heading 59.03, and Heading 59.01 was treated as limited to buckram and similar stiffened textile fabrics, not all stiffened fabrics. The departmental circular dated 13 June 1986 was treated as binding on excise authorities and required interlining cloth that did not fit those headings to be classified under Chapters 50 to 55 according to the predominance of textile material by weight. The classification order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment under the relevant tariff entries. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296341