<?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 505 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237073</link>
    <description>Where an EPCG authorisation specifies both the product description and the applicable HS code, the imported goods must conform to the tariff classification actually applicable; description alone is insufficient. Storage bins made of galvanized sheets, nuts, bolts, angles and frames, without mechanical or thermal equipment, were classified as containers of iron and steel, not machinery, so EPCG benefit was unavailable. Separately, storage bins that only store goods and do not perform a manufacturing or production function do not qualify as capital goods under the Foreign Trade Policy, and were therefore outside the EPCG scheme. The denial of EPCG benefit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 505 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237073</link>
      <description>Where an EPCG authorisation specifies both the product description and the applicable HS code, the imported goods must conform to the tariff classification actually applicable; description alone is insufficient. Storage bins made of galvanized sheets, nuts, bolts, angles and frames, without mechanical or thermal equipment, were classified as containers of iron and steel, not machinery, so EPCG benefit was unavailable. Separately, storage bins that only store goods and do not perform a manufacturing or production function do not qualify as capital goods under the Foreign Trade Policy, and were therefore outside the EPCG scheme. The denial of EPCG benefit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237073</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>