<?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>2006 (5) TMI 9 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=496</link>
    <description>Motorized talking parrot toys were held classifiable under sub-heading 9503.49.09 as toys representing animals or other non-human creatures, because Heading 95.03 treated the specific animal/non-human creature category as applicable even where the toy incorporated a motor. Sub-heading 9503.80.01, covering other toys and models incorporating a motor, was treated as residuary and applicable only when no prior specific sub-heading covered the goods. The item&#039;s plastic, fabric-covered construction did not alter that classification. The earlier view in the motorized galloping horse matter was overruled, and the specific sub-heading prevailed over the residual motorized-toy entry.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39944" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 9 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=496</link>
      <description>Motorized talking parrot toys were held classifiable under sub-heading 9503.49.09 as toys representing animals or other non-human creatures, because Heading 95.03 treated the specific animal/non-human creature category as applicable even where the toy incorporated a motor. Sub-heading 9503.80.01, covering other toys and models incorporating a motor, was treated as residuary and applicable only when no prior specific sub-heading covered the goods. The item&#039;s plastic, fabric-covered construction did not alter that classification. The earlier view in the motorized galloping horse matter was overruled, and the specific sub-heading prevailed over the residual motorized-toy entry.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>