<?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>1994 (5) TMI 114 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83324</link>
    <description>An imported capacitance bridge was treated as a testing instrument, not as raw material, component, intermediate product or consumable used in manufacturing the resultant product. The exemption notification for advance licence and DEEC clearance applied only to materials satisfying that definition, and the item&#039;s use in checking capacitor banks did not make it an integral part of the manufactured goods. Inclusion in the advance licence or DEEC book was held insufficient by itself to confer exemption unless the notification conditions were independently met. The stated position was that the customs exemption was therefore unavailable for the item.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:03:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (5) TMI 114 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83324</link>
      <description>An imported capacitance bridge was treated as a testing instrument, not as raw material, component, intermediate product or consumable used in manufacturing the resultant product. The exemption notification for advance licence and DEEC clearance applied only to materials satisfying that definition, and the item&#039;s use in checking capacitor banks did not make it an integral part of the manufactured goods. Inclusion in the advance licence or DEEC book was held insufficient by itself to confer exemption unless the notification conditions were independently met. The stated position was that the customs exemption was therefore unavailable for the item.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>