Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to project import assessment under Heading 84.66 of Section XVI of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for machinery imported for setting up a cassette-pre-recording and duplication unit.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the same or similar issue had already been considered by the Madras High Court in relation to import of equipment for a film processing laboratory, where the project import facility had been recognised. It also took note that the departmental attempt to distinguish the activity as not involving an industrial plant or industrial activity was analogous to the objections rejected in that decision. In the absence of any contrary decision of the Supreme Court or another High Court, the Tribunal treated the High Court ruling as governing the controversy and found no need to independently re-examine the merits of the departmental objections.
Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to the benefit of project import assessment under Heading 84.66, and the order denying concessional assessment was set aside in favour of the assessee.