<?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>1987 (9) TMI 233 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73835</link>
    <description>Printed cartons were treated in trade parlance as products of the printing industry because their essential character was created by the printing process, and the added slitting and gumming functions did not alter that character; exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. therefore applied. Refund was then confined to the period permitted by the statutory refund limitation, with relief available only for claims filed within time and for duty paid under protest, while the earlier part of the claim remained barred. The governing principle was that an undefined fiscal expression is construed by commercial understanding, and refund claims before statutory authorities are subject to the prescribed limitation rule.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 18:12:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (9) TMI 233 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73835</link>
      <description>Printed cartons were treated in trade parlance as products of the printing industry because their essential character was created by the printing process, and the added slitting and gumming functions did not alter that character; exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. therefore applied. Refund was then confined to the period permitted by the statutory refund limitation, with relief available only for claims filed within time and for duty paid under protest, while the earlier part of the claim remained barred. The governing principle was that an undefined fiscal expression is construed by commercial understanding, and refund claims before statutory authorities are subject to the prescribed limitation rule.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>