<?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>1991 (3) TMI 263 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81266</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal and restoring the original Orders-in-Original by the Assistant Collector. The Tribunal held that Snap Fasteners do not qualify as &quot;Metallic Embellishment&quot; under Notification No. 224/85-Cus, aligning with the precedent set in a prior case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:02:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (3) TMI 263 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81266</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal and restoring the original Orders-in-Original by the Assistant Collector. The Tribunal held that Snap Fasteners do not qualify as &quot;Metallic Embellishment&quot; under Notification No. 224/85-Cus, aligning with the precedent set in a prior case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81266</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>