<?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>1983 (5) TMI 232 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166122</link>
    <description>Classification for countervailing duty turned on the real nature and function of porcelain plug valves: although assessed for basic customs duty as electrical components and containing metal fittings, they were not mere porcelain ware, so the duty was wrongly levied and refundable. Exemption for explosion proof lighting fixtures failed because Notification No. 82/60-Customs applied only to component parts of machinery required for initial setting up, assembly or manufacture, and the fixtures were only factory illumination equipment, not parts or accessories of machinery. The essentiality certificate did not bind customs classification. The appeal succeeded only on the refund claim for the valves and failed on the exemption claim for the lighting fixtures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2014 13:12:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (5) TMI 232 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166122</link>
      <description>Classification for countervailing duty turned on the real nature and function of porcelain plug valves: although assessed for basic customs duty as electrical components and containing metal fittings, they were not mere porcelain ware, so the duty was wrongly levied and refundable. Exemption for explosion proof lighting fixtures failed because Notification No. 82/60-Customs applied only to component parts of machinery required for initial setting up, assembly or manufacture, and the fixtures were only factory illumination equipment, not parts or accessories of machinery. The essentiality certificate did not bind customs classification. The appeal succeeded only on the refund claim for the valves and failed on the exemption claim for the lighting fixtures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166122</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>