<?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>2002 (2) TMI 161 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51125</link>
    <description>A central air conditioning plant assembled from compressors, ducting, piping, insulators and related parts was treated as a system brought into existence only by combination of components, not as excisable goods as a whole. A Board circular issued under section 37B clarified that individual parts may be dutiable, but the completed refrigeration or air conditioning system is not itself to be assessed as excisable goods. Relying on that clarification and supporting Supreme Court authority, the demand on the air conditioning system was held unsustainable and the consequential penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:28:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 161 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51125</link>
      <description>A central air conditioning plant assembled from compressors, ducting, piping, insulators and related parts was treated as a system brought into existence only by combination of components, not as excisable goods as a whole. A Board circular issued under section 37B clarified that individual parts may be dutiable, but the completed refrigeration or air conditioning system is not itself to be assessed as excisable goods. Relying on that clarification and supporting Supreme Court authority, the demand on the air conditioning system was held unsustainable and the consequential penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51125</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>