<?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 (8) TMI 1086 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104587</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, classifying the imported items as Project Imports under Heading 98.01 instead of finished toys under Heading 95.03. The items were deemed to be patterns for making molds, considered auxiliary equipment essential for the project. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a liberal interpretation of the Customs Tariff and detailed, reasoned findings in classification disputes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:28:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 1086 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104587</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, classifying the imported items as Project Imports under Heading 98.01 instead of finished toys under Heading 95.03. The items were deemed to be patterns for making molds, considered auxiliary equipment essential for the project. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a liberal interpretation of the Customs Tariff and detailed, reasoned findings in classification disputes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104587</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>