<?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 (10) TMI 165 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89614</link>
    <description>Customs classification of a printer depended on its functional integration with a phototype-setting and composing machine. Technical material, inspection, and the interdependence of the components showed that the printer was essential to the main system and had no independent function as an automatic data-processing unit on these facts. Under Section Notes 3, 4 and 5 of Section XVI, composite machines and interconnected components contributing to a clearly defined principal function are classified by that principal function. Separate invoicing did not affect classification, and the printer was treated as part of the main machine rather than as a separately classifiable item.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:48:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 165 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89614</link>
      <description>Customs classification of a printer depended on its functional integration with a phototype-setting and composing machine. Technical material, inspection, and the interdependence of the components showed that the printer was essential to the main system and had no independent function as an automatic data-processing unit on these facts. Under Section Notes 3, 4 and 5 of Section XVI, composite machines and interconnected components contributing to a clearly defined principal function are classified by that principal function. Separate invoicing did not affect classification, and the printer was treated as part of the main machine rather than as a separately classifiable item.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>