<?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 (8) TMI 107 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48840</link>
    <description>Packing an additional item with a product does not constitute manufacture under Note 6 to Section XVI unless an incomplete or unfinished article is converted into a complete one with the essential character of the finished product. The Aquaguard unit was treated as a complete water-filtering and purifying unit when cleared under heading 8421.10, and laboratory material showed it could produce safe drinking water without the prefilter. The prefilter was therefore regarded as a supplementary accessory that reduced turbidity and improved efficiency, not as an integral component needed to complete the unit. On that reasoning, Note 6 had no application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:18:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 107 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48840</link>
      <description>Packing an additional item with a product does not constitute manufacture under Note 6 to Section XVI unless an incomplete or unfinished article is converted into a complete one with the essential character of the finished product. The Aquaguard unit was treated as a complete water-filtering and purifying unit when cleared under heading 8421.10, and laboratory material showed it could produce safe drinking water without the prefilter. The prefilter was therefore regarded as a supplementary accessory that reduced turbidity and improved efficiency, not as an integral component needed to complete the unit. On that reasoning, Note 6 had no application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48840</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>