<?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>2010 (5) TMI 309 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78563</link>
    <description>Classification of an imported plant turned on its substantive character: a captive power plant set up to supply power exclusively to a dedicated user was treated differently from a power generation project serving consumers generally. On the facts, the plant was held to be captive because the user had substantial ownership and control, and the conditions under the Electricity Rules, 2005 supported that status. Prior registration under the project import scheme did not prevent the Department from applying the correct duty rate at final assessment, especially where assessment remained provisional. The concessional rate for a power generation project was therefore unavailable, and the import was classified as a captive power plant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:57:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 309 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78563</link>
      <description>Classification of an imported plant turned on its substantive character: a captive power plant set up to supply power exclusively to a dedicated user was treated differently from a power generation project serving consumers generally. On the facts, the plant was held to be captive because the user had substantial ownership and control, and the conditions under the Electricity Rules, 2005 supported that status. Prior registration under the project import scheme did not prevent the Department from applying the correct duty rate at final assessment, especially where assessment remained provisional. The concessional rate for a power generation project was therefore unavailable, and the import was classified as a captive power plant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78563</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>