<?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 (10) TMI 245 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86032</link>
    <description>Imported IC engine parts for stationary and industrial engines, including engines used in dumpers, were held outside Tariff Item 34A because motor vehicles under Tariff Item 34 were confined to mechanically propelled vehicles designed for use upon roads. Applying the predominant use test and the HSN description treating dumpers as off-highway vehicles, the Tribunal concluded that parts used in such dumpers were not motor vehicle parts for Item 34A. The Department&#039;s reliance on Supreme Court dismissals was found unhelpful because they did not decide the legal question. The parts were therefore classifiable under the residuary Tariff Item 68 for CVD purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:24:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 245 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86032</link>
      <description>Imported IC engine parts for stationary and industrial engines, including engines used in dumpers, were held outside Tariff Item 34A because motor vehicles under Tariff Item 34 were confined to mechanically propelled vehicles designed for use upon roads. Applying the predominant use test and the HSN description treating dumpers as off-highway vehicles, the Tribunal concluded that parts used in such dumpers were not motor vehicle parts for Item 34A. The Department&#039;s reliance on Supreme Court dismissals was found unhelpful because they did not decide the legal question. The parts were therefore classifiable under the residuary Tariff Item 68 for CVD purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>