<?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 (11) TMI 792 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98406</link>
    <description>Commercial identity and technical features determine excise classification: an anaesthetic trolley with multiple medical components and functional apparatus was treated as an anaesthetic machine/appliance under heading 9018.00, not as medical furniture under heading 9402.00. Incidental mobility on a trolley did not alter the essential character of the goods, and the notification benefit for an anaesthetic trolley was unavailable on those facts. The note also explains that describing the goods as a trolley in classification lists, while other records referred to them as a machine, amounted to suppression of facts for extended limitation purposes, and supported penalty under the excise rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:47:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 792 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98406</link>
      <description>Commercial identity and technical features determine excise classification: an anaesthetic trolley with multiple medical components and functional apparatus was treated as an anaesthetic machine/appliance under heading 9018.00, not as medical furniture under heading 9402.00. Incidental mobility on a trolley did not alter the essential character of the goods, and the notification benefit for an anaesthetic trolley was unavailable on those facts. The note also explains that describing the goods as a trolley in classification lists, while other records referred to them as a machine, amounted to suppression of facts for extended limitation purposes, and supported penalty under the excise rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>