<?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 (7) TMI 625 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106459</link>
    <description>Aviation Turbine Fuel claiming exemption as &quot;Kerosene&quot; under Notification No. 19/94-Cus. had to satisfy not only the specified technical characteristics but also the express condition that it is ordinarily used as an illuminant in oil burning lamps. Although the product met the hydrocarbon oil and smoke point criteria, the record did not establish the required ordinary-use condition. Mere classification under the same tariff heading as Kerosene was insufficient. The notification was therefore to be construed strictly, and the claimant had to bring the product clearly within every term of the exemption entry. On that basis, ATF was not entitled to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:22:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 625 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106459</link>
      <description>Aviation Turbine Fuel claiming exemption as &quot;Kerosene&quot; under Notification No. 19/94-Cus. had to satisfy not only the specified technical characteristics but also the express condition that it is ordinarily used as an illuminant in oil burning lamps. Although the product met the hydrocarbon oil and smoke point criteria, the record did not establish the required ordinary-use condition. Mere classification under the same tariff heading as Kerosene was insufficient. The notification was therefore to be construed strictly, and the claimant had to bring the product clearly within every term of the exemption entry. On that basis, ATF was not entitled to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106459</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>