<?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>2008 (4) TMI 603 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123787</link>
    <description>A chromatography data station was held classifiable as an automatic data processing machine under CET sub-heading 8471.00, not as part of a gas chromatograph under CET sub-heading 9027.00. The equipment, consisting of interface cards, monitor, printer, keyboard and cable, received signals from the chromatograph, processed them and displayed results, but operated as an independent assembly. Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 required goods falling under Chapters 84, 85, 90 or 91 to be classified in their respective headings, so mere utility as a component of the chromatograph was not decisive. The prior ruling cited by the assessee was distinguished because the relevant chapter note had not been considered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:14:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 603 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123787</link>
      <description>A chromatography data station was held classifiable as an automatic data processing machine under CET sub-heading 8471.00, not as part of a gas chromatograph under CET sub-heading 9027.00. The equipment, consisting of interface cards, monitor, printer, keyboard and cable, received signals from the chromatograph, processed them and displayed results, but operated as an independent assembly. Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 required goods falling under Chapters 84, 85, 90 or 91 to be classified in their respective headings, so mere utility as a component of the chromatograph was not decisive. The prior ruling cited by the assessee was distinguished because the relevant chapter note had not been considered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123787</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>