<?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 (6) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88460</link>
    <description>Forged steel grinding media balls cleared in finished form without any further processing by the buyer were held classifiable as other articles of iron and steel, not as pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging. The manufacturing process involved rolling, cutting, heating, forging, heat treatment and tempering, and the goods emerged as complete articles ready for use; the cited precedent on rough forged products requiring later machining was therefore distinguishable. The incomplete description in the classification list also indicated that the goods had not been fully disclosed. On that basis, the classification under the residuary-type heading was sustained and the challenge to the demand failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 18:33:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125525" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (6) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88460</link>
      <description>Forged steel grinding media balls cleared in finished form without any further processing by the buyer were held classifiable as other articles of iron and steel, not as pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging. The manufacturing process involved rolling, cutting, heating, forging, heat treatment and tempering, and the goods emerged as complete articles ready for use; the cited precedent on rough forged products requiring later machining was therefore distinguishable. The incomplete description in the classification list also indicated that the goods had not been fully disclosed. On that basis, the classification under the residuary-type heading was sustained and the challenge to the demand failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>