<?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>1999 (3) TMI 281 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92093</link>
    <description>Imported hot melt equipment used to deliver molten adhesive through a heated hose and extrusion gun was held classifiable under Heading 8424.20 as a spraying appliance, because its decisive function was application of adhesive through the nozzle rather than treatment of materials under Heading 84.19 or classification as cable-making machinery under Heading 8479.40. The same equipment was also found eligible for concessional treatment under Notification No. 59/87-Cus. because it operated as a mechanical appliance for spraying a liquid or powder analogue, with electricity used only to maintain the adhesive in molten form and no applicable exclusion shown. The result was partial relief on the exemption issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:32:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 281 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92093</link>
      <description>Imported hot melt equipment used to deliver molten adhesive through a heated hose and extrusion gun was held classifiable under Heading 8424.20 as a spraying appliance, because its decisive function was application of adhesive through the nozzle rather than treatment of materials under Heading 84.19 or classification as cable-making machinery under Heading 8479.40. The same equipment was also found eligible for concessional treatment under Notification No. 59/87-Cus. because it operated as a mechanical appliance for spraying a liquid or powder analogue, with electricity used only to maintain the adhesive in molten form and no applicable exclusion shown. The result was partial relief on the exemption issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>