<?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 382 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88730</link>
    <description>Imported sensors for an automatic door mechanism were held not classifiable as base metal articles under Heading 8302.60 or electrical switches under Heading 8536.50, because they emitted microwaves and transmitted a signal to a separate door-opening device rather than making or breaking an electrical circuit. Classification under Heading 9032.89 was also found unsupported, as the goods were not shown to be automatic regulating or controlling instruments. Although a possible reference to Heading 90.31 and HSN material was noted, that issue had not been fully argued and the record was incomplete. The tariff dispute was therefore remanded for de novo consideration and fresh classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:27:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 382 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88730</link>
      <description>Imported sensors for an automatic door mechanism were held not classifiable as base metal articles under Heading 8302.60 or electrical switches under Heading 8536.50, because they emitted microwaves and transmitted a signal to a separate door-opening device rather than making or breaking an electrical circuit. Classification under Heading 9032.89 was also found unsupported, as the goods were not shown to be automatic regulating or controlling instruments. Although a possible reference to Heading 90.31 and HSN material was noted, that issue had not been fully argued and the record was incomplete. The tariff dispute was therefore remanded for de novo consideration and fresh classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88730</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>