<?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>2005 (8) TMI 442 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115681</link>
    <description>Imported stainless steel wedger filter screen was examined for classification under Heading 8421.99 as a filter element or under Heading 7326.99 as an article of stainless steel, and for eligibility to Notification No. 172/89. The operative distinction turned on the true nature of the goods: the appellate authority found that the item was not a filter element, but only a part wholly and solely designed for use in filtering machinery. In the absence of catalogue or other material establishing the exact function and identity of the goods, that finding was accepted. The HSN note relied on by the Revenue, being applicable to filter elements, was held not decisive on those facts, and the respondent&#039;s classification and notification benefit were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 11:04:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 442 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115681</link>
      <description>Imported stainless steel wedger filter screen was examined for classification under Heading 8421.99 as a filter element or under Heading 7326.99 as an article of stainless steel, and for eligibility to Notification No. 172/89. The operative distinction turned on the true nature of the goods: the appellate authority found that the item was not a filter element, but only a part wholly and solely designed for use in filtering machinery. In the absence of catalogue or other material establishing the exact function and identity of the goods, that finding was accepted. The HSN note relied on by the Revenue, being applicable to filter elements, was held not decisive on those facts, and the respondent&#039;s classification and notification benefit were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>