<?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>2023 (11) TMI 413 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445522</link>
    <description>A vehicle specially conceived, designed and equipped for riot control was classified as a special purpose motor vehicle under Heading 8705 because its construction and fittings showed that its primary function was non-transport, with carriage of police personnel only incidental. The HSN Explanatory Notes supported classification of vehicles specially constructed or adapted for non-transport functions, and the registration and certificates issued by the competent technical and transport authorities were treated as relevant indicators. The argument for Heading 8703 failed because the vehicle had to be assessed holistically by its overall design and utility, not by isolated transport features.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 10:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=731794" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 413 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445522</link>
      <description>A vehicle specially conceived, designed and equipped for riot control was classified as a special purpose motor vehicle under Heading 8705 because its construction and fittings showed that its primary function was non-transport, with carriage of police personnel only incidental. The HSN Explanatory Notes supported classification of vehicles specially constructed or adapted for non-transport functions, and the registration and certificates issued by the competent technical and transport authorities were treated as relevant indicators. The argument for Heading 8703 failed because the vehicle had to be assessed holistically by its overall design and utility, not by isolated transport features.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445522</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>