<?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>1997 (9) TMI 247 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87408</link>
    <description>Imported component parts of honing machines were treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 156/86 to the extent they fell within the relevant tariff headings, including Heading 84.66 and, where appropriate, Heading 98.06. The notification was applied on the basis that parts accepted as machine-tool components were not excluded merely because some items might not independently fit Heading 84.66. Relief from auxiliary duty under Notification No. 159/88 followed consequentially where the customs exemption applied. Because the record did not identify all individual items with sufficient clarity, a fresh factual examination and de novo classification of the goods was required, with opportunity to adduce evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 17:26:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 247 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87408</link>
      <description>Imported component parts of honing machines were treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 156/86 to the extent they fell within the relevant tariff headings, including Heading 84.66 and, where appropriate, Heading 98.06. The notification was applied on the basis that parts accepted as machine-tool components were not excluded merely because some items might not independently fit Heading 84.66. Relief from auxiliary duty under Notification No. 159/88 followed consequentially where the customs exemption applied. Because the record did not identify all individual items with sufficient clarity, a fresh factual examination and de novo classification of the goods was required, with opportunity to adduce evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>