<?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>1995 (10) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85182</link>
    <description>A TV front cabinet made directly from plastic raw material remained an article made of plastics for exemption under Notification No. 182/82, because the presence of only four small embedded metal screws or inserts did not alter its essential plastic character. The classification dispute turned on the true character of the goods, and the embedded metal parts were treated as incidental. Reliance on the torch classification decision was held inapplicable because that commodity was commercially distinct, while the present item was understood as a plastic article. The exemption was therefore available, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:49:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85182</link>
      <description>A TV front cabinet made directly from plastic raw material remained an article made of plastics for exemption under Notification No. 182/82, because the presence of only four small embedded metal screws or inserts did not alter its essential plastic character. The classification dispute turned on the true character of the goods, and the embedded metal parts were treated as incidental. Reliance on the torch classification decision was held inapplicable because that commodity was commercially distinct, while the present item was understood as a plastic article. The exemption was therefore available, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>