<?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>2003 (6) TMI 47 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51895</link>
    <description>Ball point pen ink was classified as writing ink under Heading 3215.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act for countervailing duty purposes, not as other ink under Heading 3215.90. The classification turned on comparison of the tariff wording with the H.S.N. Explanatory Notes, with the tariff entry treated as decisive where it supported writing-ink classification. Earlier Tribunal rulings were followed, and the product was regarded as water-based writing ink used for writing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:07:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90373" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (6) TMI 47 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51895</link>
      <description>Ball point pen ink was classified as writing ink under Heading 3215.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act for countervailing duty purposes, not as other ink under Heading 3215.90. The classification turned on comparison of the tariff wording with the H.S.N. Explanatory Notes, with the tariff entry treated as decisive where it supported writing-ink classification. Earlier Tribunal rulings were followed, and the product was regarded as water-based writing ink used for writing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>