<?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>2007 (11) TMI 645 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185003</link>
    <description>Imported LPG conversion kits were held not to fall within the prohibition required for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court read Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as a regulatory provision governing alteration of motor vehicles and permitting modification of engines or other parts for use with different fuels, including LPG, subject to prescribed conditions. On that construction, the provision did not prohibit import of LPG conversion kits or the conversion of fuel systems from petrol to LPG or compressed natural gas. Confiscation under Section 111(d) was therefore not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2016 11:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 645 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185003</link>
      <description>Imported LPG conversion kits were held not to fall within the prohibition required for confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Supreme Court read Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as a regulatory provision governing alteration of motor vehicles and permitting modification of engines or other parts for use with different fuels, including LPG, subject to prescribed conditions. On that construction, the provision did not prohibit import of LPG conversion kits or the conversion of fuel systems from petrol to LPG or compressed natural gas. Confiscation under Section 111(d) was therefore not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>