<?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>2013 (9) TMI 103 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236670</link>
    <description>Mobile crawler cranes imported after commissioning of a crude petroleum refinery were analysed under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., Serial No. 228, read with List 17 entries 44 and 45. The interpretation turned on whether goods required for running, repair and maintenance after initial setting up remained covered by the exemption. A harmonious reading treated the main entry and the supporting list entries as complementary, so the expression &quot;setting up&quot; was not confined so narrowly as to exclude post-commissioning maintenance goods. On that view, the cranes qualified for concessional duty, while the dissent considered the exemption limited to goods required only up to completion of setup.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 12:26:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199077" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 103 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236670</link>
      <description>Mobile crawler cranes imported after commissioning of a crude petroleum refinery were analysed under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., Serial No. 228, read with List 17 entries 44 and 45. The interpretation turned on whether goods required for running, repair and maintenance after initial setting up remained covered by the exemption. A harmonious reading treated the main entry and the supporting list entries as complementary, so the expression &quot;setting up&quot; was not confined so narrowly as to exclude post-commissioning maintenance goods. On that view, the cranes qualified for concessional duty, while the dissent considered the exemption limited to goods required only up to completion of setup.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>