<?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>2008 (1) TMI 112 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4133</link>
    <description>Architectural components such as panels, cornices, arches, columns, ceilings and brackets were treated as goods classifiable under Heading 6807.20 rather than Heading 6807.90 because the tariff phrase &quot;of a kind used in&quot; was read broadly to cover items functionally akin to blocks, slabs, beams and similar prefabricated building components. Their architectural nomenclature or differing shape did not prevent classification under the specific heading where they served as building components. The analysis also relied on supporting architectural certificates, concessional treatment in notifications, tariff history, and the absence of contrary evidence from the Revenue. The goods were held correctly classifiable under Heading 6807.20.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 112 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4133</link>
      <description>Architectural components such as panels, cornices, arches, columns, ceilings and brackets were treated as goods classifiable under Heading 6807.20 rather than Heading 6807.90 because the tariff phrase &quot;of a kind used in&quot; was read broadly to cover items functionally akin to blocks, slabs, beams and similar prefabricated building components. Their architectural nomenclature or differing shape did not prevent classification under the specific heading where they served as building components. The analysis also relied on supporting architectural certificates, concessional treatment in notifications, tariff history, and the absence of contrary evidence from the Revenue. The goods were held correctly classifiable under Heading 6807.20.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>