<?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 (9) TMI 311 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92488</link>
    <description>The classification of the goods turned on whether they were parts of doors and windows under Heading 7308.30 or residual goods under Heading 7308.90, and whether cutting and bending amounted to manufacture. The matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication after considering subsequent case law and the actual work involved, so the classification and manufacturing question remained to be determined on a fuller factual and legal examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 10:41:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 311 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92488</link>
      <description>The classification of the goods turned on whether they were parts of doors and windows under Heading 7308.30 or residual goods under Heading 7308.90, and whether cutting and bending amounted to manufacture. The matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication after considering subsequent case law and the actual work involved, so the classification and manufacturing question remained to be determined on a fuller factual and legal examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92488</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>