<?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>1987 (9) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74496</link>
    <description>The imported vertical high speed wire enamelling machine was treated as machinery for treating metals because enamelling was viewed as analogous to lacquering and tin plating, producing a qualitative change in the wire&#039;s surface properties. On that basis, the lower authority&#039;s narrower approach was not accepted, and the machine was classified under T.I. 84.59(2) of the Customs Tariff Act rather than as a machine not intended for production of goods under T.I. 84.59(1).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:20:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112775" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (9) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74496</link>
      <description>The imported vertical high speed wire enamelling machine was treated as machinery for treating metals because enamelling was viewed as analogous to lacquering and tin plating, producing a qualitative change in the wire&#039;s surface properties. On that basis, the lower authority&#039;s narrower approach was not accepted, and the machine was classified under T.I. 84.59(2) of the Customs Tariff Act rather than as a machine not intended for production of goods under T.I. 84.59(1).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>