<?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>1996 (11) TMI 81 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44582</link>
    <description>Pistons and gaskets of internal combustion engines were classified under the old tariff by applying the predominant user test and examining whether they fell within Tariff Entry 34A. The Tribunal found that the goods were not covered by Entry 34A and, in the absence of a specific entry, applied the residuary Entry 68. That classification was upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:13:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83111" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (11) TMI 81 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44582</link>
      <description>Pistons and gaskets of internal combustion engines were classified under the old tariff by applying the predominant user test and examining whether they fell within Tariff Entry 34A. The Tribunal found that the goods were not covered by Entry 34A and, in the absence of a specific entry, applied the residuary Entry 68. That classification was upheld, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44582</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>