<?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>2001 (3) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45878</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether import of a thyristor converter and ceramic wool, as parts of a second-hand temper mill and bright annealing furnace imported under an export-zone permit, contravened the import licence by effectively importing new machinery. The SC held that contravention arises only if, under the guise of second-hand machinery, the importer substantially imports new machinery; a converter constituting a small fraction of value and shown by inspection to be indispensable for the mill&#039;s functionality did not alter the machinery&#039;s second-hand character, and the Tribunal&#039;s contrary reading of the inspection report was unsustainable; consequently, the import of the converter was within the licence. The SC further held that replacing a periodically replaceable component with limited lifespan (ceramic wool) in a second-hand furnace did not require prior board permission and did not convert the furnace into new machinery; consequently, the import was permissible. Appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2026 19:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 94 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45878</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether import of a thyristor converter and ceramic wool, as parts of a second-hand temper mill and bright annealing furnace imported under an export-zone permit, contravened the import licence by effectively importing new machinery. The SC held that contravention arises only if, under the guise of second-hand machinery, the importer substantially imports new machinery; a converter constituting a small fraction of value and shown by inspection to be indispensable for the mill&#039;s functionality did not alter the machinery&#039;s second-hand character, and the Tribunal&#039;s contrary reading of the inspection report was unsustainable; consequently, the import of the converter was within the licence. The SC further held that replacing a periodically replaceable component with limited lifespan (ceramic wool) in a second-hand furnace did not require prior board permission and did not convert the furnace into new machinery; consequently, the import was permissible. Appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45878</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>