<?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>2002 (2) TMI 717 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101727</link>
    <description>Classification of the motor vehicles turned on their essential design rather than end use. The expression &quot;principally designed&quot; was read by reference to the vehicle&#039;s design features and the distribution of weight, with HSN/WCO guidance treated as persuasive. On the available material, the vehicles&#039; major payload and structural features were directed to cargo carriage, so incidental carriage of crew, family members or labourers did not change their essential character. Advertisements, RTO/ARAI materials and similar documents were not treated as conclusive for central excise classification. The vehicles were therefore not classifiable under Heading 8703 and were correctly classifiable under Heading 8704.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:58:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 717 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101727</link>
      <description>Classification of the motor vehicles turned on their essential design rather than end use. The expression &quot;principally designed&quot; was read by reference to the vehicle&#039;s design features and the distribution of weight, with HSN/WCO guidance treated as persuasive. On the available material, the vehicles&#039; major payload and structural features were directed to cargo carriage, so incidental carriage of crew, family members or labourers did not change their essential character. Advertisements, RTO/ARAI materials and similar documents were not treated as conclusive for central excise classification. The vehicles were therefore not classifiable under Heading 8703 and were correctly classifiable under Heading 8704.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101727</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>