<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1397 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273588</link>
    <description>Imported dialyzers were treated as classifiable under CTH 90189031, with the corresponding customs exemption notifications available to the importer. A departmental circular had later suggested classification under CTH 84212900 for purifier dialyzers, but the earlier classification had already been accepted and the issue was covered by authorities cited before the Tribunal. On that basis, the denial of exemption was rejected and the duty demand was found unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 06:04:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=525562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1397 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273588</link>
      <description>Imported dialyzers were treated as classifiable under CTH 90189031, with the corresponding customs exemption notifications available to the importer. A departmental circular had later suggested classification under CTH 84212900 for purifier dialyzers, but the earlier classification had already been accepted and the issue was covered by authorities cited before the Tribunal. On that basis, the denial of exemption was rejected and the duty demand was found unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>