<?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>1986 (9) TMI 313 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72750</link>
    <description>Excisable grey yarn remained dutiable when removed for processing, and wastage arising during later dyeing and finishing of hand-knitting yarn was treated as a post-manufacturing loss. In the absence of a specific statutory provision or notification granting exemption or remission for such wastage, central excise duty could not be avoided. Notification No. 52/72-C.E. did not apply on the facts found, so the duty demand was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 17:41:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111029" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 313 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72750</link>
      <description>Excisable grey yarn remained dutiable when removed for processing, and wastage arising during later dyeing and finishing of hand-knitting yarn was treated as a post-manufacturing loss. In the absence of a specific statutory provision or notification granting exemption or remission for such wastage, central excise duty could not be avoided. Notification No. 52/72-C.E. did not apply on the facts found, so the duty demand was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>