<?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>1995 (12) TMI 186 - CEGAT , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85268</link>
    <description>Ferro alloys manufactured by the alumino thermic process were treated as eligible for exemption as goods manufactured without the aid of power under Notification No. 209/83-C.E. The record indicated that such alloys could be produced without power and that the process used fell within the notification. Incidental use of power in allied activities, including operating a blower or hoist or preparing aluminium powder, did not change the character of the finished goods, because those activities did not directly form part of the manufacture of the exempt goods. The exemption therefore remained available, and the connected limitation issue was left undecided as unnecessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:13:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 186 - CEGAT , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85268</link>
      <description>Ferro alloys manufactured by the alumino thermic process were treated as eligible for exemption as goods manufactured without the aid of power under Notification No. 209/83-C.E. The record indicated that such alloys could be produced without power and that the process used fell within the notification. Incidental use of power in allied activities, including operating a blower or hoist or preparing aluminium powder, did not change the character of the finished goods, because those activities did not directly form part of the manufacture of the exempt goods. The exemption therefore remained available, and the connected limitation issue was left undecided as unnecessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85268</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>