<?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>2024 (9) TMI 1364 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759120</link>
    <description>Imported polyester goods described and marketed as bed sheets were treated as made-up furnishing articles under Heading 6304, not as woven fabrics under Heading 5407, because their size, appearance, commercial identity and intended use supported classification as bed sheets. Inconclusive test reports and the absence of complete hemming did not displace the common parlance and commercial identity analysis. Section XI Note 7 was applied to confirm that the goods answered the description of made-up articles by reason of ready use. On that basis, reclassification was found unsustainable and the confiscation, duty demand, redemption fine and penalty based on the contrary view were not upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:01:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1364 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759120</link>
      <description>Imported polyester goods described and marketed as bed sheets were treated as made-up furnishing articles under Heading 6304, not as woven fabrics under Heading 5407, because their size, appearance, commercial identity and intended use supported classification as bed sheets. Inconclusive test reports and the absence of complete hemming did not displace the common parlance and commercial identity analysis. Section XI Note 7 was applied to confirm that the goods answered the description of made-up articles by reason of ready use. On that basis, reclassification was found unsustainable and the confiscation, duty demand, redemption fine and penalty based on the contrary view were not upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>