<?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>1997 (10) TMI 150 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87423</link>
    <description>Housing and covers imported for transmitters, positioners, recorders and indicators were held to fall within Notification No. 69/86-Cus. because the notification covered both parts and accessories under the relevant tariff entries. The narrower view that only accessories were eligible was incorrect, and the goods were within the exemption scope as parts. The denial of exemption was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 18:09:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124490" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (10) TMI 150 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87423</link>
      <description>Housing and covers imported for transmitters, positioners, recorders and indicators were held to fall within Notification No. 69/86-Cus. because the notification covered both parts and accessories under the relevant tariff entries. The narrower view that only accessories were eligible was incorrect, and the goods were within the exemption scope as parts. The denial of exemption was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87423</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>