TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 63/95-C.E. despite not being job workers and having cleared the goods through BEML to the Ministry of Defence.
Analysis: The Tribunal applied an earlier coordinate decision where exemption under the predecessor notification was extended to a manufacturer who was neither a job worker nor a direct clearer to the Ministry of Defence. On the same facts, the present clearances through BEML were held to stand on the same footing, and the earlier ratio was treated as fully applicable.
Conclusion: The appellants were held eligible for exemption under Notification No. 63/95-C.E., and the denial of benefit was set aside.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
