<?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>1989 (3) TMI 265 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74786</link>
    <description>Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was construed as an integrated exemption scheme for first clearances in a financial year: a manufacturer with goods falling under more than one tariff heading could claim exemption up to the aggregate first-clearance limit of Rs. 30 lakhs, provided clearances under any single heading did not exceed Rs. 15 lakhs. The interpretation allowed different headings to be combined within the overall ceiling, and excess clearances under one heading did not make clearances under other eligible headings dutiable before the aggregate limit was exhausted. On the stated facts, the exemption remained available and the duty demand and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 10:18:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (3) TMI 265 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74786</link>
      <description>Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was construed as an integrated exemption scheme for first clearances in a financial year: a manufacturer with goods falling under more than one tariff heading could claim exemption up to the aggregate first-clearance limit of Rs. 30 lakhs, provided clearances under any single heading did not exceed Rs. 15 lakhs. The interpretation allowed different headings to be combined within the overall ceiling, and excess clearances under one heading did not make clearances under other eligible headings dutiable before the aggregate limit was exhausted. On the stated facts, the exemption remained available and the duty demand and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>