<?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 (1) TMI 292 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92010</link>
    <description>35 mm projection lenses used in cinematographic projectors were classifiable as objective lenses under sub-heading 9002.11, not as parts of projectors under sub-heading 9007.92, because Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 90 requires goods that are themselves covered by a specific heading to remain classified in that heading rather than as machine parts. As the lenses fell within Heading 90.02, they could not be treated as projector parts merely by reason of their use. The exemption under Notification No. 93/86-Cus. was confined to cinematographic projectors under Heading 90.07 and parts classifiable with that heading, so it did not extend to separately classifiable objective lenses. The appeal therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:57:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 292 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92010</link>
      <description>35 mm projection lenses used in cinematographic projectors were classifiable as objective lenses under sub-heading 9002.11, not as parts of projectors under sub-heading 9007.92, because Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 90 requires goods that are themselves covered by a specific heading to remain classified in that heading rather than as machine parts. As the lenses fell within Heading 90.02, they could not be treated as projector parts merely by reason of their use. The exemption under Notification No. 93/86-Cus. was confined to cinematographic projectors under Heading 90.07 and parts classifiable with that heading, so it did not extend to separately classifiable objective lenses. The appeal therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>