<?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>1988 (1) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYD.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42192</link>
    <description>For excise classification of composite fabrics, the percentage of cotton had to be assessed by reference to the final manufactured product, not merely the base fabric. On the analyst&#039;s reports, the cotton content in the end product was well below the 40% threshold, so the coated fabrics could not be treated as cotton fabrics under Tariff Item No. 19(III). The earlier classification therefore could not stand, and the duty collected on that basis was refundable to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:03:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80721" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (1) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYD.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42192</link>
      <description>For excise classification of composite fabrics, the percentage of cotton had to be assessed by reference to the final manufactured product, not merely the base fabric. On the analyst&#039;s reports, the cotton content in the end product was well below the 40% threshold, so the coated fabrics could not be treated as cotton fabrics under Tariff Item No. 19(III). The earlier classification therefore could not stand, and the duty collected on that basis was refundable to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>