<?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>2022 (6) TMI 433 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423592</link>
    <description>A modified PVC polymer copolymer was classifiable under CTH 39029000 because, for Chapter 39, copolymers are classified by the co-monomer unit predominating by weight over each other single co-monomer unit. The record showed butadiene as the predominant constituent, and as an olefin the product fell within the heading for polymers of other olefins in primary forms. The department relied mainly on the product description and did not conduct chemical testing, so its reliance on acrylic ester nomenclature was not supported. On that basis, classification under CTH 39069090 was rejected and the exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Cus remained admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2022 08:25:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681619" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 433 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423592</link>
      <description>A modified PVC polymer copolymer was classifiable under CTH 39029000 because, for Chapter 39, copolymers are classified by the co-monomer unit predominating by weight over each other single co-monomer unit. The record showed butadiene as the predominant constituent, and as an olefin the product fell within the heading for polymers of other olefins in primary forms. The department relied mainly on the product description and did not conduct chemical testing, so its reliance on acrylic ester nomenclature was not supported. On that basis, classification under CTH 39069090 was rejected and the exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Cus remained admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423592</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>