<?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>1996 (2) TMI 225 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85036</link>
    <description>Rectified spirit ethyl alcohol was held not liable to central excise duty under Tariff Item 22.04 because it was not presently, practically, and commercially suitable for use as fuel. The Tribunal applied the settled construction of &quot;suitable for use&quot; to require actual present fitness for the specified use, not a merely casual, incidental, exceptional, or future possible use. The product contained about 94 to 95 per cent alcohol with the balance water, but no present suitability as fuel was shown. The possibility that technological or legal changes might later permit such use was held irrelevant to current excisability and marketability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:36:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 225 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85036</link>
      <description>Rectified spirit ethyl alcohol was held not liable to central excise duty under Tariff Item 22.04 because it was not presently, practically, and commercially suitable for use as fuel. The Tribunal applied the settled construction of &quot;suitable for use&quot; to require actual present fitness for the specified use, not a merely casual, incidental, exceptional, or future possible use. The product contained about 94 to 95 per cent alcohol with the balance water, but no present suitability as fuel was shown. The possibility that technological or legal changes might later permit such use was held irrelevant to current excisability and marketability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>