<?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>2007 (4) TMI 485 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121675</link>
    <description>Diesel generator sets imported for initial setting up of a nuclear power plant were treated as part of the project import because uninterrupted power supply was necessary for safety, commissioning, and regulatory clearance. The emergency power arrangement was not regarded as a separate stand-by facility in the ordinary sense, but as a functional component of the project itself. The distinction drawn from cases involving captive power plants for general industrial use was found inapplicable on these facts. The DG sets were therefore held eligible for the benefit under Sr. No. 401 of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 14:19:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 485 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121675</link>
      <description>Diesel generator sets imported for initial setting up of a nuclear power plant were treated as part of the project import because uninterrupted power supply was necessary for safety, commissioning, and regulatory clearance. The emergency power arrangement was not regarded as a separate stand-by facility in the ordinary sense, but as a functional component of the project itself. The distinction drawn from cases involving captive power plants for general industrial use was found inapplicable on these facts. The DG sets were therefore held eligible for the benefit under Sr. No. 401 of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>