<?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>Imported network interface cards and communication modules: CTI 8517 70 90 parts vs 8517 62 90 machines; demand time-barred</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95802</link>
    <description>Imported network interface cards/communication modules were classifiable as &quot;parts&quot; under CTI 8517 70 90, not as machines under CTI 8517 62 90, because an article is not a &quot;part&quot; only if it can perform an independent individual function on a standalone basis; here the goods could not communicate or achieve the intended transmission function unless slotted/assembled and configured with other components, akin to parts that are functionally inseparable from the host apparatus, so the reclassification demand failed. Invocation of the extended limitation period was unsustainable because mere self-assessment and an alleged revenue-motivated classification did not establish willful misstatement or suppression on the facts, so the demand was time-barred; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. - CESTAT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:30:40 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:30:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=876443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Imported network interface cards and communication modules: CTI 8517 70 90 parts vs 8517 62 90 machines; demand time-barred</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95802</link>
      <description>Imported network interface cards/communication modules were classifiable as &quot;parts&quot; under CTI 8517 70 90, not as machines under CTI 8517 62 90, because an article is not a &quot;part&quot; only if it can perform an independent individual function on a standalone basis; here the goods could not communicate or achieve the intended transmission function unless slotted/assembled and configured with other components, akin to parts that are functionally inseparable from the host apparatus, so the reclassification demand failed. Invocation of the extended limitation period was unsustainable because mere self-assessment and an alleged revenue-motivated classification did not establish willful misstatement or suppression on the facts, so the demand was time-barred; the impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed. - CESTAT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:30:40 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>