<?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>2009 (12) TMI 259 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76827</link>
    <description>A portable linear ultrasound scanner specifically included in the medical and surgical instruments category under a scheme classification could not be reclassified under the broader entry for electronic instruments and appliances carrying higher support. The principle that a specific description prevails over a general one was applied, along with the popular and commercial understanding of the goods. Because the item was already placed by the competent classification committee in the specific medical category, there was no basis to recast it under the generic entry. The writ court also would not sit in appeal over an administrative classification made on relevant materials, absent clear legal error.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 259 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76827</link>
      <description>A portable linear ultrasound scanner specifically included in the medical and surgical instruments category under a scheme classification could not be reclassified under the broader entry for electronic instruments and appliances carrying higher support. The principle that a specific description prevails over a general one was applied, along with the popular and commercial understanding of the goods. Because the item was already placed by the competent classification committee in the specific medical category, there was no basis to recast it under the generic entry. The writ court also would not sit in appeal over an administrative classification made on relevant materials, absent clear legal error.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>