<?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 (7) TMI 621 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210289</link>
    <description>Imported railway brake components imported in unassembled form were treated as parts of complete railway brake sets, so Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation applied and the goods were classified as the complete article with its essential character. The components were not &quot;parts of general use&quot; under Note 2 to Section XV, and the presence of items such as nuts did not change their character. Because the goods were specifically used as parts of railway brakes, they fell under heading 8607 for railway or tramway locomotives or rolling stock rather than the tariff headings relied on by Revenue. The Revenue&#039;s classification was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Aug 2013 13:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183724" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 621 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210289</link>
      <description>Imported railway brake components imported in unassembled form were treated as parts of complete railway brake sets, so Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation applied and the goods were classified as the complete article with its essential character. The components were not &quot;parts of general use&quot; under Note 2 to Section XV, and the presence of items such as nuts did not change their character. Because the goods were specifically used as parts of railway brakes, they fell under heading 8607 for railway or tramway locomotives or rolling stock rather than the tariff headings relied on by Revenue. The Revenue&#039;s classification was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>