<?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>2000 (2) TMI 127 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48778</link>
    <description>Paperboard articles supplied in flattened form, intended to be folded, adjusted and glued into cartons, boxes or containers, retain their essential packaging character for tariff classification. Mere printing on the outer shells, slides and hinged lid blanks did not alter their commercial identity, because in common trade and functional use they remained packaging articles. On that basis, the goods fell within sub-heading 4818.13 as printed cartons, boxes and cases, rather than the residuary sub-heading 4818.19. The departmental classification was upheld, and the disputed goods were treated as cartons, boxes or containers in their commercial and functional character.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:09:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 127 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48778</link>
      <description>Paperboard articles supplied in flattened form, intended to be folded, adjusted and glued into cartons, boxes or containers, retain their essential packaging character for tariff classification. Mere printing on the outer shells, slides and hinged lid blanks did not alter their commercial identity, because in common trade and functional use they remained packaging articles. On that basis, the goods fell within sub-heading 4818.13 as printed cartons, boxes and cases, rather than the residuary sub-heading 4818.19. The departmental classification was upheld, and the disputed goods were treated as cartons, boxes or containers in their commercial and functional character.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48778</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>