<?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>2019 (5) TMI 1031 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380303</link>
    <description>Household-type refrigerators were treated as classifiable under CTH 84181090 rather than CTH 841821, because the classification issue had already been decided against the assessee in its earlier case. That prior ruling was followed, so the present classification challenge did not succeed. As the customs exemption claim depended on the classification, it also failed. The appeals were dismissed on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2019 06:17:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=571613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1031 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380303</link>
      <description>Household-type refrigerators were treated as classifiable under CTH 84181090 rather than CTH 841821, because the classification issue had already been decided against the assessee in its earlier case. That prior ruling was followed, so the present classification challenge did not succeed. As the customs exemption claim depended on the classification, it also failed. The appeals were dismissed on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380303</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>