<?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>1993 (6) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83171</link>
    <description>Imported radial tyres designed for both on-road and off-road use were held outside the scope of the concessional countervailing duty exemption under Notification No. 20/84-C.E. because the notification covered only specified tyre categories and did not extend to tyres intended for multiple applications. Tariff Item 16 distinguished tyres for motor vehicles from tyres for vehicles or equipment designed for off-road use, and the exemption was treated as clear and unambiguous. Beneficial construction was held inapplicable to enlarge an exemption notification beyond its express terms, so the claim for concessional duty failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:06:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (6) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83171</link>
      <description>Imported radial tyres designed for both on-road and off-road use were held outside the scope of the concessional countervailing duty exemption under Notification No. 20/84-C.E. because the notification covered only specified tyre categories and did not extend to tyres intended for multiple applications. Tariff Item 16 distinguished tyres for motor vehicles from tyres for vehicles or equipment designed for off-road use, and the exemption was treated as clear and unambiguous. Beneficial construction was held inapplicable to enlarge an exemption notification beyond its express terms, so the claim for concessional duty failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83171</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>