<?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>1989 (9) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80373</link>
    <description>Contemporaneous import documents may be read together to determine whether a machine answers a notification description for concessional customs assessment. Here, the bill of entry, invoice, packing list, correspondence and catalogue showed that the imported unit was an automatic trimming, threading, rolling, beading and knurling machine capable of use for rigid cans and hollow bodies of non-ferrous metals. The absence of the words &quot;rigid can&quot; in the invoice alone did not defeat the claim, because the broader record established that the machine fell within the description in Notification No. 40/CUS/78 dated 01-03-1978. Exemption was therefore available on the basis of the full documentary description.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:40:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117519" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (9) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80373</link>
      <description>Contemporaneous import documents may be read together to determine whether a machine answers a notification description for concessional customs assessment. Here, the bill of entry, invoice, packing list, correspondence and catalogue showed that the imported unit was an automatic trimming, threading, rolling, beading and knurling machine capable of use for rigid cans and hollow bodies of non-ferrous metals. The absence of the words &quot;rigid can&quot; in the invoice alone did not defeat the claim, because the broader record established that the machine fell within the description in Notification No. 40/CUS/78 dated 01-03-1978. Exemption was therefore available on the basis of the full documentary description.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80373</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>