<?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>2004 (1) TMI 277 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53287</link>
    <description>Classification under Rule 2(a) turns on the condition of goods as cleared and whether they have the essential character of the complete article. The Bangalore factory clearances were found to consist only of sub-assemblies and loose parts, with no established correlation showing that each clearance amounted to a complete washing machine in unassembled form. Because the goods lacked the essential character of washing machines at removal, they were not assessable as CKD/SKD washing machines merely because they were described as kits. They were correctly classified as parts of washing machines, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91764" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 277 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53287</link>
      <description>Classification under Rule 2(a) turns on the condition of goods as cleared and whether they have the essential character of the complete article. The Bangalore factory clearances were found to consist only of sub-assemblies and loose parts, with no established correlation showing that each clearance amounted to a complete washing machine in unassembled form. Because the goods lacked the essential character of washing machines at removal, they were not assessable as CKD/SKD washing machines merely because they were described as kits. They were correctly classified as parts of washing machines, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>