<?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>1999 (5) TMI 95 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90985</link>
    <description>Exemption notifications are construed strictly, and concessional duty applies only where the importer and goods satisfy the stated conditions and tariff description exactly. Populated printed circuit boards imported for direct use in an uninterrupted power supply unit did not qualify for Notification No. 232/83-Cus. because the prescribed actual user certificate was not produced and the goods were not covered as unpopulated boards for further manufacture. Direct current chokes and chokers also fell outside Notification No. 134/86-Cus. because they were not specifically listed in the relevant entry. The exemption claims therefore failed on both counts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:20:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 95 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90985</link>
      <description>Exemption notifications are construed strictly, and concessional duty applies only where the importer and goods satisfy the stated conditions and tariff description exactly. Populated printed circuit boards imported for direct use in an uninterrupted power supply unit did not qualify for Notification No. 232/83-Cus. because the prescribed actual user certificate was not produced and the goods were not covered as unpopulated boards for further manufacture. Direct current chokes and chokers also fell outside Notification No. 134/86-Cus. because they were not specifically listed in the relevant entry. The exemption claims therefore failed on both counts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>