<?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>1996 (1) TMI 187 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84772</link>
    <description>Substantial expansion under Heading 84.66 requires an addition comparable to setting up a new unit; mere modernisation, revamping, or upgrading an existing unit to increase output is insufficient. On that reasoning, the claim for registration of the import contract was rejected, and the issue was answered against the appellant and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:00:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (1) TMI 187 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84772</link>
      <description>Substantial expansion under Heading 84.66 requires an addition comparable to setting up a new unit; mere modernisation, revamping, or upgrading an existing unit to increase output is insufficient. On that reasoning, the claim for registration of the import contract was rejected, and the issue was answered against the appellant and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>