https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293266 Hybrid electric vehicles were not covered by serial no. 48(d) of Notification No. 1/2017-Compensation Cess (Rate), as amended, because the entry applied only where both the compression-ignition engine and the electric motor functioned as motors for propulsion. The AAR held that an electric motor must independently propel the vehicle, not merely assist the engine through start-stop, regenerative or boosting functions. As the applicant's own description showed only assistive use of the motor, and the certificates relied on did not establish propulsion capability, the essential condition for the concessional entry was not met. The vehicles were therefore not liable to compensation cess at 15% under that entry. en-us Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Feb 2025 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293266 Hybrid electric vehicles were not covered by serial no. 48(d) of Notification No. 1/2017-Compensation Cess (Rate), as amended, because the entry applied only where both the compression-ignition engine and the electric motor functioned as motors for propulsion. The AAR held that an electric motor must independently propel the vehicle, not merely assist the engine through start-stop, regenerative or boosting functions. As the applicant's own description showed only assistive use of the motor, and the certificates relied on did not establish propulsion capability, the essential condition for the concessional entry was not met. The vehicles were therefore not liable to compensation cess at 15% under that entry. Case-Laws GST Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293266