<?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>1992 (7) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81948</link>
    <description>Imported knitting machine needles were held eligible for exemption because the decisive classification question was whether the machines for which they were meant were domestic or industrial in character. The material on record showed machines used in cottage industry with versatile features such as wider knitting patterns, multiple colours, varied yarns, and design functions, indicating industrial-type capability rather than household use. The exclusion for domestic knitting machines under Heading 98.06 therefore did not apply, and the broader label of home or cottage use was not treated as determinative. Classification had to be based on the machine&#039;s features, capabilities, and intended use as disclosed by the record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:30:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (7) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81948</link>
      <description>Imported knitting machine needles were held eligible for exemption because the decisive classification question was whether the machines for which they were meant were domestic or industrial in character. The material on record showed machines used in cottage industry with versatile features such as wider knitting patterns, multiple colours, varied yarns, and design functions, indicating industrial-type capability rather than household use. The exclusion for domestic knitting machines under Heading 98.06 therefore did not apply, and the broader label of home or cottage use was not treated as determinative. Classification had to be based on the machine&#039;s features, capabilities, and intended use as disclosed by the record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81948</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>