<?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>2013 (12) TMI 1388 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241723</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that the product &quot;Shunt&quot; should not be classified under CETH 8533.00 as argued by the revenue department but under CETH 9030.00, as contended by the appellants. The decision was based on the specialized nature of shunts as components for ammeters, distinct from general resistors, supported by detailed product descriptions and evidence presented. The Tribunal emphasized that shunts serve the specific purpose of preventing excessive current flow, unlike resistors that provide resistance. Consequently, the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the classification of the product as per the appellant&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2013 10:10:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341257" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 1388 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241723</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that the product &quot;Shunt&quot; should not be classified under CETH 8533.00 as argued by the revenue department but under CETH 9030.00, as contended by the appellants. The decision was based on the specialized nature of shunts as components for ammeters, distinct from general resistors, supported by detailed product descriptions and evidence presented. The Tribunal emphasized that shunts serve the specific purpose of preventing excessive current flow, unlike resistors that provide resistance. Consequently, the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the classification of the product as per the appellant&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241723</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>