<?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 (2) TMI 251 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83925</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported &quot;Wilshire Mechanical Refrigeration Post Mix-Beverage Fountain with Key Lock Facility&quot; under Customs Tariff Heading 8418.69 as &quot;Other refrigerating or freezing equipment.&quot; It ruled that the equipment qualified for the benefit of Customs Notification No. 59/87, despite performing additional functions of mixing and carbonation, as its primary function was refrigeration. The penalty issue for mis-declaration of value was not specifically addressed, with the focus remaining on classification and eligibility for the notification benefit. The appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:20:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121069" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (2) TMI 251 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83925</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported &quot;Wilshire Mechanical Refrigeration Post Mix-Beverage Fountain with Key Lock Facility&quot; under Customs Tariff Heading 8418.69 as &quot;Other refrigerating or freezing equipment.&quot; It ruled that the equipment qualified for the benefit of Customs Notification No. 59/87, despite performing additional functions of mixing and carbonation, as its primary function was refrigeration. The penalty issue for mis-declaration of value was not specifically addressed, with the focus remaining on classification and eligibility for the notification benefit. The appeal was allowed, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83925</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>