<?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 (11) TMI 192 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86271</link>
    <description>The Surgraphic Recorder imported with the surface roughness testing equipment was treated as part of the composite machine because the system was ordered and invoiced as a complete unit, supplier correspondence showed the recording facility was essential for precision bearing inspection, and separate pricing was unavailable. The catalogue reference to added versatility did not alter its character where the evidence showed it was necessary for the intended use of the equipment. On that basis, the recorder was not an optional accessory divorced from the machine, and exemption extended with the main instrument; denial of exemption was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:31:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123338" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (11) TMI 192 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86271</link>
      <description>The Surgraphic Recorder imported with the surface roughness testing equipment was treated as part of the composite machine because the system was ordered and invoiced as a complete unit, supplier correspondence showed the recording facility was essential for precision bearing inspection, and separate pricing was unavailable. The catalogue reference to added versatility did not alter its character where the evidence showed it was necessary for the intended use of the equipment. On that basis, the recorder was not an optional accessory divorced from the machine, and exemption extended with the main instrument; denial of exemption was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>