<?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 (5) TMI 173 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90088</link>
    <description>Welding transformers manufactured as welding machines with an inbuilt transformer were classified as welding machines under Tariff Heading 8515.00, not as transformers under Tariff Heading 8404.00. The catalogue and expert certificate showed that the product was a welding machine and not a standalone transformer, and the HSN notes relied on by the Revenue were held applicable only where a transformer is presented separately with associated welding equipment. Because the transformer was built into the machine and not supplied as a separate component, the classification in favour of the assessee was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s contrary claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:56:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (5) TMI 173 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90088</link>
      <description>Welding transformers manufactured as welding machines with an inbuilt transformer were classified as welding machines under Tariff Heading 8515.00, not as transformers under Tariff Heading 8404.00. The catalogue and expert certificate showed that the product was a welding machine and not a standalone transformer, and the HSN notes relied on by the Revenue were held applicable only where a transformer is presented separately with associated welding equipment. Because the transformer was built into the machine and not supplied as a separate component, the classification in favour of the assessee was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s contrary claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>