<?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 (10) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82158</link>
    <description>Imported Drais Pearl Mill was held to be a general purpose grinding machine because the literature showed multiple uses, including pigment pastes, printing inks, coating compounds and other materials, and the record did not establish exclusive design for printing ink production. The importers&#039; own description confirmed that grinding was an operating function of the machine. On that basis, the machine was classifiable under Heading 84.59(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and not under Heading 84.59(2) for a machine designed for producing printing ink; the Revenue&#039;s appeal succeeded and the earlier classification was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 12:58:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119303" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (10) TMI 172 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82158</link>
      <description>Imported Drais Pearl Mill was held to be a general purpose grinding machine because the literature showed multiple uses, including pigment pastes, printing inks, coating compounds and other materials, and the record did not establish exclusive design for printing ink production. The importers&#039; own description confirmed that grinding was an operating function of the machine. On that basis, the machine was classifiable under Heading 84.59(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and not under Heading 84.59(2) for a machine designed for producing printing ink; the Revenue&#039;s appeal succeeded and the earlier classification was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>