<?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>2025 (12) TMI 1154 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783614</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was classification of imported PVC Resin SP660 Suspension Grade and the consequential applicable BCD rate under the relevant exemption notification. The Tribunal held that the goods were correctly classifiable under CTH 39042110 (other poly(vinyl chloride), non-plasticised) and not under CTH 39041090, relying on its earlier decisions on identical facts where the same test report and technical clarification were rejected as insufficient to alter classification. As a result, exemption under the notification entry applicable to CTH 39042110 applied and BCD was chargeable at 2% rather than 5%; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=872711" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1154 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783614</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was classification of imported PVC Resin SP660 Suspension Grade and the consequential applicable BCD rate under the relevant exemption notification. The Tribunal held that the goods were correctly classifiable under CTH 39042110 (other poly(vinyl chloride), non-plasticised) and not under CTH 39041090, relying on its earlier decisions on identical facts where the same test report and technical clarification were rejected as insufficient to alter classification. As a result, exemption under the notification entry applicable to CTH 39042110 applied and BCD was chargeable at 2% rather than 5%; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>