<?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>2009 (8) TMI 1067 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154975</link>
    <description>Self-floating pipes imported as part of a complete dredging package are analysed as prima facie classifiable as dredger parts under CTH 8905.10 rather than vulcanised rubber articles under CTH 4009.42.00. Their intended use with the dredger, including reducers adjusted for operating distance from shore, supports their integral connection with dredging equipment. Section Note 2 of Section XVII is treated as inapplicable where such goods are imported as parts of a complete machine. On this view, the alleged misdeclaration, consequential duty demand, penalties and confiscation lack a prima facie basis, supporting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:00:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172006" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1067 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154975</link>
      <description>Self-floating pipes imported as part of a complete dredging package are analysed as prima facie classifiable as dredger parts under CTH 8905.10 rather than vulcanised rubber articles under CTH 4009.42.00. Their intended use with the dredger, including reducers adjusted for operating distance from shore, supports their integral connection with dredging equipment. Section Note 2 of Section XVII is treated as inapplicable where such goods are imported as parts of a complete machine. On this view, the alleged misdeclaration, consequential duty demand, penalties and confiscation lack a prima facie basis, supporting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>