<?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>1983 (7) TMI 177 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73034</link>
    <description>Rebate under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was confined to excisable goods actually exported in accordance with the notification conditions. Where electric motors were not exported separately but were fitted as component parts in grinders and drilling machines exported outside India, their inclusion in the machinery did not amount to export of the motors themselves. The rebate claim on the motors was therefore not admissible and was rightly rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 16:58:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111313" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 177 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73034</link>
      <description>Rebate under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was confined to excisable goods actually exported in accordance with the notification conditions. Where electric motors were not exported separately but were fitted as component parts in grinders and drilling machines exported outside India, their inclusion in the machinery did not amount to export of the motors themselves. The rebate claim on the motors was therefore not admissible and was rightly rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73034</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>