<?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 (9) TMI 448 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116794</link>
    <description>Imported centre bearing assembly used between the front and rear propeller shaft of commercial vehicles was held classifiable as a motor vehicle part under heading 8708.99, not as an article under heading 84.83. The tariff note to Section XVII excluded items covered by heading 84.83 where they formed integral vehicle parts, and the explanatory notes supported classification of transmission equipment designed principally for use with vehicles under heading 8708. Treating the assembly as part of the propeller shaft, the tribunal found the revenue classification consistent with the tariff scheme and its earlier view on similar goods. The appeals failed and the classification adopted by the revenue authorities was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:48:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 448 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116794</link>
      <description>Imported centre bearing assembly used between the front and rear propeller shaft of commercial vehicles was held classifiable as a motor vehicle part under heading 8708.99, not as an article under heading 84.83. The tariff note to Section XVII excluded items covered by heading 84.83 where they formed integral vehicle parts, and the explanatory notes supported classification of transmission equipment designed principally for use with vehicles under heading 8708. Treating the assembly as part of the propeller shaft, the tribunal found the revenue classification consistent with the tariff scheme and its earlier view on similar goods. The appeals failed and the classification adopted by the revenue authorities was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116794</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>