<?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>2000 (2) TMI 519 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95834</link>
    <description>A product described as an energy-saving combination refrigerated closed-loop fluid cooler and hot air paper dryer was held to fall under sub-heading 8419.00 because the classification had already been settled by an earlier appellate order that was not challenged. The record showed that the machine performed two functions: chilling water by refrigeration and heating printed paper rolls by using process heat, but there was no basis to treat refrigeration as its basic function so as to disturb the accepted classification. The small-scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was also available, as earlier orders had already extended that benefit. The Revenue&#039;s appeal therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:09:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132893" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 519 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95834</link>
      <description>A product described as an energy-saving combination refrigerated closed-loop fluid cooler and hot air paper dryer was held to fall under sub-heading 8419.00 because the classification had already been settled by an earlier appellate order that was not challenged. The record showed that the machine performed two functions: chilling water by refrigeration and heating printed paper rolls by using process heat, but there was no basis to treat refrigeration as its basic function so as to disturb the accepted classification. The small-scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was also available, as earlier orders had already extended that benefit. The Revenue&#039;s appeal therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95834</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>