Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
CESTAT New Delhi held that an aircraft used for transporting persons for remuneration falls under public transport, not private use. Referring to M/s.V.R.L. Logistics, it determined the aircraft's usage as non-scheduled (Passenger) service, complying with Condition No.104 of Notification No.21/2002-Cus. The Tribunal upheld the decision, dismissing appeals as no violation occurred, resolving issues of confiscation, interest, and penalty. The definition of 'Air Transport Service' and 'Scheduled Air Transport Service' from Aircraft Rules guided the classification, emphasizing the distinction between private and public transport aircraft.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.