<?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>1993 (7) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43632</link>
    <description>Additional customs duty on imported Foley Balloon Catheters was not chargeable because Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ties the levy to excise duty payable on a like article manufactured in India. The relevant excise notification granted full exemption to medical and surgical instruments, including suction catheters, and the product was treated as falling within that description. A later customs explanation excluding Foley Balloon Catheters did not affect liability under Section 3, since the decisive test was whether excise duty was leviable domestically on a like article. On that basis, the demand was set aside and the writ petition succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:34:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (7) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43632</link>
      <description>Additional customs duty on imported Foley Balloon Catheters was not chargeable because Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ties the levy to excise duty payable on a like article manufactured in India. The relevant excise notification granted full exemption to medical and surgical instruments, including suction catheters, and the product was treated as falling within that description. A later customs explanation excluding Foley Balloon Catheters did not affect liability under Section 3, since the decisive test was whether excise duty was leviable domestically on a like article. On that basis, the demand was set aside and the writ petition succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>