<?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 (10) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86168</link>
    <description>Notification No. 197/76 exempted specified articles and component parts imported for use in mineral oil or gas exploration, but did not cover oil well cement quality-testing equipment as ancillary equipment of cementation units. The wording treated bunkers, rather than cementation units, as qualifying ancillary equipment, and the testing equipment was not a component part of a cementation unit; the exemption claim was therefore rejected. Project import treatment also required proof that the relevant contract had been registered. Without such evidence, the project import claim was rejected. The appeal failed on both grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:52:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 271 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86168</link>
      <description>Notification No. 197/76 exempted specified articles and component parts imported for use in mineral oil or gas exploration, but did not cover oil well cement quality-testing equipment as ancillary equipment of cementation units. The wording treated bunkers, rather than cementation units, as qualifying ancillary equipment, and the testing equipment was not a component part of a cementation unit; the exemption claim was therefore rejected. Project import treatment also required proof that the relevant contract had been registered. Without such evidence, the project import claim was rejected. The appeal failed on both grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>