<?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 (6) TMI 126 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91839</link>
    <description>Imported photocopier parts without the populated circuit board were treated as reconditioned components, not a complete photocopier or merely second-hand goods. Because the import policy permitted reconditioned photocopier components against a special import licence, that permission could not be defeated by construing the same goods as second-hand in a way that would make the policy entry redundant. The analysis also reflects the principle that one provision should not be interpreted so as to nullify a parallel provision. On that basis, the goods were regarded as eligible for import against the special import licence and the confiscation, fine and penalty were stated not to stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:26:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 126 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91839</link>
      <description>Imported photocopier parts without the populated circuit board were treated as reconditioned components, not a complete photocopier or merely second-hand goods. Because the import policy permitted reconditioned photocopier components against a special import licence, that permission could not be defeated by construing the same goods as second-hand in a way that would make the policy entry redundant. The analysis also reflects the principle that one provision should not be interpreted so as to nullify a parallel provision. On that basis, the goods were regarded as eligible for import against the special import licence and the confiscation, fine and penalty were stated not to stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>