Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai: No Duty on Limestone & Raw Meal</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the duty demand on limestone and raw meal/slurry. The Tribunal ... Manufacture- the demand of duty on limestone purchased in lumps and broken into small pieces, the contention of the appellants that the process does not amount to ‘manufacture’. In the light of the decision of S.A.I.L. v. Collector of Central Excise [1991 (54) E.L.T. 414 (Tribunal)], held that- Chapter Heading 2505 does not cover products that have been roasted, calcined or obtained by mixing, while raw meal/slurry is a product obtained by mixing limestone, clay etc. The department does not seek classification of this item under any other heading of the Tariff. In the result, demands on both the products in dispute are set aside and the appeal allowed. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for duty on limestone and raw meal/slurry. The Tribunal accepted that the process of breaking limestone does not amount to 'manufacture'. It also noted that raw meal/slurry is not excisable under Chapter Heading 2505 as it is obtained by mixing limestone and clay. The appeal was allowed, and the demands on both products were set aside.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
