<?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>2002 (1) TMI 556 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101123</link>
    <description>Chassis cleared without bodies did not qualify as fuel-efficient light commercial motor vehicles for Notification No. 462/86-C.E., because exemption depends on the goods as actually removed and a chassis is separately classified from a motor vehicle under Chapter 87. The exemption was therefore denied. Duty, however, had to be recomputed in line with the larger bench valuation ruling governing deduction of duty from invoice price and reassessment of assessable value. Penalty was set aside because the dispute involved interpretation of the exemption notification and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief supported by earlier departmental conduct.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:00:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 556 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101123</link>
      <description>Chassis cleared without bodies did not qualify as fuel-efficient light commercial motor vehicles for Notification No. 462/86-C.E., because exemption depends on the goods as actually removed and a chassis is separately classified from a motor vehicle under Chapter 87. The exemption was therefore denied. Duty, however, had to be recomputed in line with the larger bench valuation ruling governing deduction of duty from invoice price and reassessment of assessable value. Penalty was set aside because the dispute involved interpretation of the exemption notification and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief supported by earlier departmental conduct.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101123</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>