<?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 (5) TMI 1834 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460491</link>
    <description>Wireless micro phones classified under Chapter 85 were treated as covered by Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. because the exemption used the term &quot;micro phones&quot; without excluding wireless variants or limiting the class of goods by heading. On that reading, the imported wireless micro phones qualified for customs duty exemption, and the denial of benefit in the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 18:56:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792848" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1834 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460491</link>
      <description>Wireless micro phones classified under Chapter 85 were treated as covered by Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. because the exemption used the term &quot;micro phones&quot; without excluding wireless variants or limiting the class of goods by heading. On that reading, the imported wireless micro phones qualified for customs duty exemption, and the denial of benefit in the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460491</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>