<?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>2018 (6) TMI 18 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361191</link>
    <description>An imported Asphalt Hot Mixing Plant was treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. because the bill of entry, invoice and independent engineering report showed that it operated through PLC-based electronic controls, enabling automatic, semi-automatic and manual modes. The departmental panel report was not preferred, as it was not treated as the proper independent technical opinion and did not displace the evidence of electronic control. The key principle applied was that exemption cannot be denied merely because the plant also involves electrical operation, so long as the goods satisfy the notification condition of being electronically controlled. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2020 14:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 18 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361191</link>
      <description>An imported Asphalt Hot Mixing Plant was treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. because the bill of entry, invoice and independent engineering report showed that it operated through PLC-based electronic controls, enabling automatic, semi-automatic and manual modes. The departmental panel report was not preferred, as it was not treated as the proper independent technical opinion and did not displace the evidence of electronic control. The key principle applied was that exemption cannot be denied merely because the plant also involves electrical operation, so long as the goods satisfy the notification condition of being electronically controlled. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>