<?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 (11) TMI 128 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387879</link>
    <description>Classification of an imported casino vessel depended on the form in which it was presented for assessment, not on its earlier design or registration. The vessel&#039;s decks were fitted out with casino games, chairs and stools, and the layout was arranged for gaming rather than regular passenger carriage. On those facts, it could not be treated as a cruise ship or passenger vessel under Heading 8901; it was more appropriately classifiable as a vessel for pleasure or sports under Heading 8903. The tariff interpretation, HSN notes and cited decisions supported classification by actual presentation and intended use, and the challenge to the impugned order failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2020 13:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 128 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387879</link>
      <description>Classification of an imported casino vessel depended on the form in which it was presented for assessment, not on its earlier design or registration. The vessel&#039;s decks were fitted out with casino games, chairs and stools, and the layout was arranged for gaming rather than regular passenger carriage. On those facts, it could not be treated as a cruise ship or passenger vessel under Heading 8901; it was more appropriately classifiable as a vessel for pleasure or sports under Heading 8903. The tariff interpretation, HSN notes and cited decisions supported classification by actual presentation and intended use, and the challenge to the impugned order failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>