<?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>2011 (3) TMI 1317 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209573</link>
    <description>Where par-boiling and drying equipment function independently rather than as part of a composite rice-milling machine, classification under Heading 8419 applies and not Heading 8437. The Board circular, read with Section Notes 3 and 4 of Section XVI and Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 84, supports Heading 8437 only when the machinery forms part of a rice-mill combination performing the principal rice-milling function. On the facts recorded by the Commissioner, the plants had separate functions and were not integral to a composite rice-milling machine, so the assessee&#039;s reliance on the circular and a prior concession-based decision failed. The classification under Heading 8419 was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1317 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209573</link>
      <description>Where par-boiling and drying equipment function independently rather than as part of a composite rice-milling machine, classification under Heading 8419 applies and not Heading 8437. The Board circular, read with Section Notes 3 and 4 of Section XVI and Chapter Note 2 of Chapter 84, supports Heading 8437 only when the machinery forms part of a rice-mill combination performing the principal rice-milling function. On the facts recorded by the Commissioner, the plants had separate functions and were not integral to a composite rice-milling machine, so the assessee&#039;s reliance on the circular and a prior concession-based decision failed. The classification under Heading 8419 was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>