https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89584 Tariff classification of a pulse echo fault locator was upheld under Heading 85.08 because the catalogue did not show it to be a measuring or checking instrument, and it was not established as equipment for detecting ionising radiations. Classification of circuit breaker spares under Heading 85.18/27(1) was also sustained because the claim was unsupported by the bill of entry, invoice, catalogue, or a technical write-up; a certificate alone was insufficient. The document stresses that tariff classification must rest on credible product literature or comparable evidence showing the nature, function, and end use of the goods. en-us Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:12:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89584 Tariff classification of a pulse echo fault locator was upheld under Heading 85.08 because the catalogue did not show it to be a measuring or checking instrument, and it was not established as equipment for detecting ionising radiations. Classification of circuit breaker spares under Heading 85.18/27(1) was also sustained because the claim was unsupported by the bill of entry, invoice, catalogue, or a technical write-up; a certificate alone was insufficient. The document stresses that tariff classification must rest on credible product literature or comparable evidence showing the nature, function, and end use of the goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89584