<?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>1990 (7) TMI 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80751</link>
    <description>Raw naphtha qualified for concessional duty where it was used in an integral and indispensable stage of the integrated manufacture of fertilisers and ammonia, even though it was not used as feed stock. The expression &quot;in the manufacture of&quot; was read to cover the whole commercial production process, and a condition not stated in the notification could not be added by implication. Because the naphtha was used for the intended manufacturing purpose, there was no breach justifying demand, withdrawal of concession, forfeiture of security or penalty under Rule 196 and related provisions; those consequential actions were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:21:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117897" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80751</link>
      <description>Raw naphtha qualified for concessional duty where it was used in an integral and indispensable stage of the integrated manufacture of fertilisers and ammonia, even though it was not used as feed stock. The expression &quot;in the manufacture of&quot; was read to cover the whole commercial production process, and a condition not stated in the notification could not be added by implication. Because the naphtha was used for the intended manufacturing purpose, there was no breach justifying demand, withdrawal of concession, forfeiture of security or penalty under Rule 196 and related provisions; those consequential actions were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>