https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46353 Signal Conditioning Amplifiers were classified by reference to the relevant tariff entry and Note 2(a) of Section XVIII. The Tribunal's reliance on expert evidence that the goods were principally used with oscilloscopes, which were specifically covered by the competing heading, was upheld as sound. On that basis, the product was correctly classifiable under sub-heading 90.30 rather than sub-heading 85.18, and the Revenue's challenge to the classification failed. en-us Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:49:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46353 Signal Conditioning Amplifiers were classified by reference to the relevant tariff entry and Note 2(a) of Section XVIII. The Tribunal's reliance on expert evidence that the goods were principally used with oscilloscopes, which were specifically covered by the competing heading, was upheld as sound. On that basis, the product was correctly classifiable under sub-heading 90.30 rather than sub-heading 85.18, and the Revenue's challenge to the classification failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46353