<?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>1983 (1) TMI 268 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165961</link>
    <description>Imported armature frame and field assembly components for electric motors used in wind-screen wipers were held classifiable under Heading 85.01(2) as electric motors. The classification turned on the specific heading for electric motors, the absence of any exclusion in the heading or relevant notes, and the finding that the goods were not complete wind-screen wiper motors or parts required to be classified with the finished machine under Section Note 4 to Section XVI. Section Note 2(b) supported classification with the motor heading, while Section Note 2(c) did not apply. Classification under Heading 85.09 or Heading 85.28 was rejected, and the refund claim succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jan 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:47:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (1) TMI 268 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165961</link>
      <description>Imported armature frame and field assembly components for electric motors used in wind-screen wipers were held classifiable under Heading 85.01(2) as electric motors. The classification turned on the specific heading for electric motors, the absence of any exclusion in the heading or relevant notes, and the finding that the goods were not complete wind-screen wiper motors or parts required to be classified with the finished machine under Section Note 4 to Section XVI. Section Note 2(b) supported classification with the motor heading, while Section Note 2(c) did not apply. Classification under Heading 85.09 or Heading 85.28 was rejected, and the refund claim succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jan 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>