<?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>1996 (8) TMI 269 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85746</link>
    <description>Respirator Cartridge Assembly was treated as classifiable under Heading 90.17/18 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 rather than Heading 84.18(2), on the same reasoning applied in an earlier Tribunal decision on the identical product. The item was regarded as falling within the specific claimed heading and not as an air filter, so denial of exemption under Notification No. 208/81-Cus. was unsustainable. The assessee was therefore entitled to the claimed tariff treatment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 18:09:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122813" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 269 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85746</link>
      <description>Respirator Cartridge Assembly was treated as classifiable under Heading 90.17/18 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 rather than Heading 84.18(2), on the same reasoning applied in an earlier Tribunal decision on the identical product. The item was regarded as falling within the specific claimed heading and not as an air filter, so denial of exemption under Notification No. 208/81-Cus. was unsustainable. The assessee was therefore entitled to the claimed tariff treatment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>