<?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>1998 (3) TMI 348 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88782</link>
    <description>Water tanks and sanitary wares used in toilets and made of steel and aluminium were treated as parts of coaches under Tariff Heading 8607.00 because the classification dispute was already covered by an earlier decision in the same assessee&#039;s case. With no distinguishing feature shown, the earlier ratio was followed and the same classification was maintained, leaving the Revenue&#039;s challenge unsuccessful.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 12:44:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125847" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 348 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88782</link>
      <description>Water tanks and sanitary wares used in toilets and made of steel and aluminium were treated as parts of coaches under Tariff Heading 8607.00 because the classification dispute was already covered by an earlier decision in the same assessee&#039;s case. With no distinguishing feature shown, the earlier ratio was followed and the same classification was maintained, leaving the Revenue&#039;s challenge unsuccessful.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>