https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121972 Notification No. 21 of 2002-Cus. was read contextually to cover a weft straightening machine separately, rather than only a combined machine performing both weft straightening and calendering. The earlier notifications treated weft straightening and calendering as distinct items, and the processes were understood to occur at different stages of textile processing requiring separate machines. On that basis, the later composite entry was construed as continuing the exemption for both machines independently, so the entry remained effective for the textile industry. The imported weft straightening machine therefore qualified for exemption, and denial of concessional assessment was incorrect. en-us Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:18:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121972 Notification No. 21 of 2002-Cus. was read contextually to cover a weft straightening machine separately, rather than only a combined machine performing both weft straightening and calendering. The earlier notifications treated weft straightening and calendering as distinct items, and the processes were understood to occur at different stages of textile processing requiring separate machines. On that basis, the later composite entry was construed as continuing the exemption for both machines independently, so the entry remained effective for the textile industry. The imported weft straightening machine therefore qualified for exemption, and denial of concessional assessment was incorrect. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121972