<?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>1992 (8) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82048</link>
    <description>An exemption notification covering machinery for use in the garment or hosiery industry was construed liberally where the entry for a tee shirt printing and curing machine was capable of more than one meaning. The Tribunal treated the entry as materially consistent with the relevant import policy description, accepted the technical evidence that printing and curing were interdependent parts of the same manufacturing operation, and resolved the ambiguity in favour of the importer. On that basis, the customs exemption under Notification No. 108/89 read with Notification No. 16/85-Cus. was admissible, with consequential relief following.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:55:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119193" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (8) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82048</link>
      <description>An exemption notification covering machinery for use in the garment or hosiery industry was construed liberally where the entry for a tee shirt printing and curing machine was capable of more than one meaning. The Tribunal treated the entry as materially consistent with the relevant import policy description, accepted the technical evidence that printing and curing were interdependent parts of the same manufacturing operation, and resolved the ambiguity in favour of the importer. On that basis, the customs exemption under Notification No. 108/89 read with Notification No. 16/85-Cus. was admissible, with consequential relief following.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>