https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=808 Car air-conditioning clearances were treated as parts, not as complete air-conditioning machines, because the assessee did not manufacture or clear the essential compressor and the goods were supplied separately for fitment in vehicles. Rule 2(a) and Note 4 to Section XVI could not be used to apply the essential-character test and reclassify the goods as a complete machine. Board circulars also supported the view that no separate air-conditioning machine came into existence in the automobile context. On that basis, the duty demand, interest and penalties were set aside; limitation did not require adjudication once the levy failed. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=808 Car air-conditioning clearances were treated as parts, not as complete air-conditioning machines, because the assessee did not manufacture or clear the essential compressor and the goods were supplied separately for fitment in vehicles. Rule 2(a) and Note 4 to Section XVI could not be used to apply the essential-character test and reclassify the goods as a complete machine. Board circulars also supported the view that no separate air-conditioning machine came into existence in the automobile context. On that basis, the duty demand, interest and penalties were set aside; limitation did not require adjudication once the levy failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=808