<?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 (6) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85492</link>
    <description>Nickel-cadmium batteries imported for use in emergency lights were held not to qualify as &quot;stationary batteries&quot; for exemption under Notification No. 16/55 dated 18-4-1955. The controlling test was whether the goods were designed for service in a fixed location, and mere soldering on a printed circuit board or placement inside an emergency light was not enough to change their character. Their commercial and functional use in movable emergency lights and other portable applications showed they were not designed for fixed-location service. The materials produced by the importer did not establish commercial recognition as stationary batteries, so the exemption claim failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:05:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 177 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85492</link>
      <description>Nickel-cadmium batteries imported for use in emergency lights were held not to qualify as &quot;stationary batteries&quot; for exemption under Notification No. 16/55 dated 18-4-1955. The controlling test was whether the goods were designed for service in a fixed location, and mere soldering on a printed circuit board or placement inside an emergency light was not enough to change their character. Their commercial and functional use in movable emergency lights and other portable applications showed they were not designed for fixed-location service. The materials produced by the importer did not establish commercial recognition as stationary batteries, so the exemption claim failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>