<?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 (12) TMI 232 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87875</link>
    <description>Separately invoiced and identifiable accessories are not classified with a principal machine unless they are permanently incorporated or constitute an essential component of it. A 35 mm camera system and a colour television monitoring system imported with a microscope were treated as distinct goods because they had separate descriptions, origin, part numbers and prices, and the microscope remained functional without them. Chapter 90 notes supported separate classification where the camera was not permanently built into the microscope, and common packing did not alter tariff treatment. The cited precedents were distinguished on the basis that they involved items found to be integral to the main equipment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:10:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124941" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 232 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87875</link>
      <description>Separately invoiced and identifiable accessories are not classified with a principal machine unless they are permanently incorporated or constitute an essential component of it. A 35 mm camera system and a colour television monitoring system imported with a microscope were treated as distinct goods because they had separate descriptions, origin, part numbers and prices, and the microscope remained functional without them. Chapter 90 notes supported separate classification where the camera was not permanently built into the microscope, and common packing did not alter tariff treatment. The cited precedents were distinguished on the basis that they involved items found to be integral to the main equipment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87875</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>