https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50512 Classification turned on whether the product was monofilament yarn or an article of plastics under Chapter 39. The analysis accepted the appellant's reliance on earlier Tribunal precedent and held that the goods remained monofilament yarn, not plastic articles merely because of the manner of marketing or use. On that basis, the lower authority's classification under Chapter 39 could not stand, and the exemption-related claim followed the accepted classification. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:39:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50512 Classification turned on whether the product was monofilament yarn or an article of plastics under Chapter 39. The analysis accepted the appellant's reliance on earlier Tribunal precedent and held that the goods remained monofilament yarn, not plastic articles merely because of the manner of marketing or use. On that basis, the lower authority's classification under Chapter 39 could not stand, and the exemption-related claim followed the accepted classification. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50512