https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124315 Springs manufactured for agricultural machinery were held classifiable under Heading 73.20, because springs and leaves for springs are specifically covered there and are treated as parts of general use excluded from Chapter 84 by Note 2(b) to Section XV; the assessee's claim for Heading 84.32 was rejected. Cum-duty valuation was also available, and the duty demand had to be computed on the cum-duty price basis in accordance with binding Supreme Court precedent. The classification issue was decided against the assessee, while cum-duty relief was allowed in its favour. en-us Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:22:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124315 Springs manufactured for agricultural machinery were held classifiable under Heading 73.20, because springs and leaves for springs are specifically covered there and are treated as parts of general use excluded from Chapter 84 by Note 2(b) to Section XV; the assessee's claim for Heading 84.32 was rejected. Cum-duty valuation was also available, and the duty demand had to be computed on the cum-duty price basis in accordance with binding Supreme Court precedent. The classification issue was decided against the assessee, while cum-duty relief was allowed in its favour. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124315