<?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>2001 (11) TMI 473 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100919</link>
    <description>Classification of engine components and related parts depended on whether the goods were properly treated as motor vehicle parts under Heading 87.08 or as parts of gear boxes and similar machinery under Heading 8483.00. The analysis emphasised HSN Explanatory Notes, Section Note 1(k) to Section XVI, Section Note 2(e) to Section XVII, and commercial parlance, with technical literature, expert affidavit, and trade understanding relevant to the inquiry. In light of the earlier treatment of similar gear box and clutch parts, the impugned classification was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo reconsideration under the correct tariff heading and exclusionary notes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:03:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137969" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 473 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100919</link>
      <description>Classification of engine components and related parts depended on whether the goods were properly treated as motor vehicle parts under Heading 87.08 or as parts of gear boxes and similar machinery under Heading 8483.00. The analysis emphasised HSN Explanatory Notes, Section Note 1(k) to Section XVI, Section Note 2(e) to Section XVII, and commercial parlance, with technical literature, expert affidavit, and trade understanding relevant to the inquiry. In light of the earlier treatment of similar gear box and clutch parts, the impugned classification was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo reconsideration under the correct tariff heading and exclusionary notes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>