<?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 (10) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81627</link>
    <description>Rigid polyurethane foam was treated as non-excisable because marketability is an essential condition for excisability under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Tribunal followed its earlier rulings on the same product and held that, since the department had not proved the goods were marketable, the foam could not be subjected to duty. The issue was therefore decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:55:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 221 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81627</link>
      <description>Rigid polyurethane foam was treated as non-excisable because marketability is an essential condition for excisability under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Tribunal followed its earlier rulings on the same product and held that, since the department had not proved the goods were marketable, the foam could not be subjected to duty. The issue was therefore decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81627</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>