<?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>1992 (3) TMI 226 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82369</link>
    <description>Packing and wrapping paper used to wrap reams of paper sold in wrapped condition was treated as an integral part of the manufactured product because material necessary to make goods marketable forms part of manufacture. On that basis, the wrapping paper was regarded as a component part of the end product for Rule 56A purposes, and proforma credit was admissible. The issue was stated to be covered by the binding Supreme Court decision on the same point.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 16:23:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (3) TMI 226 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82369</link>
      <description>Packing and wrapping paper used to wrap reams of paper sold in wrapped condition was treated as an integral part of the manufactured product because material necessary to make goods marketable forms part of manufacture. On that basis, the wrapping paper was regarded as a component part of the end product for Rule 56A purposes, and proforma credit was admissible. The issue was stated to be covered by the binding Supreme Court decision on the same point.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82369</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>