<?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 (10) TMI 507 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106886</link>
    <description>Aluminium grills made from extruded aluminium sections were treated as falling within the DEPB description of &quot;extruded aluminium products including pipe and tubes&quot; because product classification depended on the principal raw material and the end product&#039;s character, not on the fact that fabrication was involved. The analysis states that fabrication does not by itself remove a product from an entry where it remains an aluminium product in substance, and analogous classification decisions supported that approach. On that basis, the grills were considered eligible for DEPB benefit, and the confiscation and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 11:58:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 507 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106886</link>
      <description>Aluminium grills made from extruded aluminium sections were treated as falling within the DEPB description of &quot;extruded aluminium products including pipe and tubes&quot; because product classification depended on the principal raw material and the end product&#039;s character, not on the fact that fabrication was involved. The analysis states that fabrication does not by itself remove a product from an entry where it remains an aluminium product in substance, and analogous classification decisions supported that approach. On that basis, the grills were considered eligible for DEPB benefit, and the confiscation and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106886</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>