https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167466 An exemption notification for "powered cycles" was construed as covering ordinary cycles to which mechanical propulsion was only an added or auxiliary feature. On that reading, Luna Mopeds were treated as distinct motorised vehicles because propulsion was intrinsic and indispensable, not incidental to a cycle. The common parlance and trade understanding test also pointed away from coverage, as mopeds were understood separately from powered cycles. The explanatory memorandum reinforced that the exemption was intended for cycles fitted with motors, not mopeds. Accordingly, Luna Mopeds fell outside Notification No. 52/77 and were not eligible for exemption from central excise duty. en-us Thu, 09 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Dec 2014 16:38:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167466 An exemption notification for "powered cycles" was construed as covering ordinary cycles to which mechanical propulsion was only an added or auxiliary feature. On that reading, Luna Mopeds were treated as distinct motorised vehicles because propulsion was intrinsic and indispensable, not incidental to a cycle. The common parlance and trade understanding test also pointed away from coverage, as mopeds were understood separately from powered cycles. The explanatory memorandum reinforced that the exemption was intended for cycles fitted with motors, not mopeds. Accordingly, Luna Mopeds fell outside Notification No. 52/77 and were not eligible for exemption from central excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 May 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167466