<?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>1994 (2) TMI 77 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48719</link>
    <description>Circular saw blades specially designed for a cutting machine were treated as parts of machinery under Heading 98.06 because that heading applies with overriding effect when its conditions are met, even though the goods also answer to Chapter 82 descriptions. However, the exemption under Notification No. 69/87-Cus. was denied because the notification expressly excluded articles specified in Chapter 82, and that exclusion had to be given effect on a harmonious reading. The goods&#039; status as non-general-use parts did not remove them from the Chapter 82 exclusion. Classification under Heading 98.06 was upheld, but the exemption claim failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2023 13:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87199" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 77 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48719</link>
      <description>Circular saw blades specially designed for a cutting machine were treated as parts of machinery under Heading 98.06 because that heading applies with overriding effect when its conditions are met, even though the goods also answer to Chapter 82 descriptions. However, the exemption under Notification No. 69/87-Cus. was denied because the notification expressly excluded articles specified in Chapter 82, and that exclusion had to be given effect on a harmonious reading. The goods&#039; status as non-general-use parts did not remove them from the Chapter 82 exclusion. Classification under Heading 98.06 was upheld, but the exemption claim failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>