<?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 (6) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90401</link>
    <description>Imported machinery used mainly for irrigation and dewatering was treated as capital goods, not consumer goods, because its function, capacity and utility showed that it did not directly satisfy human needs without further processing. On that basis, the restricted import category did not apply, the goods were regarded as freely importable under the Export and Import Policy, 1992-97, and confiscation and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:57:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (6) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90401</link>
      <description>Imported machinery used mainly for irrigation and dewatering was treated as capital goods, not consumer goods, because its function, capacity and utility showed that it did not directly satisfy human needs without further processing. On that basis, the restricted import category did not apply, the goods were regarded as freely importable under the Export and Import Policy, 1992-97, and confiscation and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>