https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122565 Imported machinery was covered by the exemption notification in force on the date of importation, and that notification did not require installation within one year or within any extended period. The one-year installation condition was introduced only by a later amendment, so the demand was based on a requirement not applicable at the time of importation. On that prima facie basis, the appellant was found entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and interim stay against recovery of duty and penalties pending appeal. en-us Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:26:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122565 Imported machinery was covered by the exemption notification in force on the date of importation, and that notification did not require installation within one year or within any extended period. The one-year installation condition was introduced only by a later amendment, so the demand was based on a requirement not applicable at the time of importation. On that prima facie basis, the appellant was found entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and interim stay against recovery of duty and penalties pending appeal. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122565