<?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>2018 (6) TMI 125 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361298</link>
    <description>Machines capable of ordinary sewing, with only incidental embroidery effects when certain functions were de-activated, were treated as sewing machines for tariff classification. Applying Note 7 to Chapter 84, the principal purpose controlled classification where a machine had more than one use. The HSN Explanatory Notes to heading 8447 exclude sewing machines that can also perform simple embroidery work, while heading 8452 covers sewing machines that may produce decorative embroidery effects but are not designed for embroidery alone. On those facts, the machines remained classifiable under heading 8452, so the exemption linked to that classification was available and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2019 14:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522437" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 125 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361298</link>
      <description>Machines capable of ordinary sewing, with only incidental embroidery effects when certain functions were de-activated, were treated as sewing machines for tariff classification. Applying Note 7 to Chapter 84, the principal purpose controlled classification where a machine had more than one use. The HSN Explanatory Notes to heading 8447 exclude sewing machines that can also perform simple embroidery work, while heading 8452 covers sewing machines that may produce decorative embroidery effects but are not designed for embroidery alone. On those facts, the machines remained classifiable under heading 8452, so the exemption linked to that classification was available and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361298</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>