https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44787 Exemption under the customs notification for viscose staple fibre and polynosic staple fibre was denied because cupro bemberg staple fibre was treated as a different product, not covered by the notification. The Tribunal relied on the customs test report, the appellant's own material, and the manufacturer's certificate to find that cupro rayon was only in the same family as viscose in physical properties, but not identical to viscose itself. Earlier test reports favouring the assessee were not treated as conclusive. The Supreme Court found no error of law in that approach and upheld the rejection of the exemption claim. en-us Thu, 30 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jul 2010 17:34:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44787 Exemption under the customs notification for viscose staple fibre and polynosic staple fibre was denied because cupro bemberg staple fibre was treated as a different product, not covered by the notification. The Tribunal relied on the customs test report, the appellant's own material, and the manufacturer's certificate to find that cupro rayon was only in the same family as viscose in physical properties, but not identical to viscose itself. Earlier test reports favouring the assessee were not treated as conclusive. The Supreme Court found no error of law in that approach and upheld the rejection of the exemption claim. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 30 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44787