<?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 (8) TMI 251 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85729</link>
    <description>Electric motors captively consumed in manufacturing power-driven pump sets were examined for duty liability and marketability. The majority view was that the department had not established the motors as marketable goods distinct from the final pump product, and that duty could not be demanded merely because the item was captively consumed; the earlier appellate view was therefore sustained and the demand rejected. The concurring member also treated marketability as essential for captive-consumption duty. The dissent held that the motors were fully manufactured before captive use, were required to be accounted for in RG-1, and were dutiable at the stage of removal for captive consumption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 17:24:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122796" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 251 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85729</link>
      <description>Electric motors captively consumed in manufacturing power-driven pump sets were examined for duty liability and marketability. The majority view was that the department had not established the motors as marketable goods distinct from the final pump product, and that duty could not be demanded merely because the item was captively consumed; the earlier appellate view was therefore sustained and the demand rejected. The concurring member also treated marketability as essential for captive-consumption duty. The dissent held that the motors were fully manufactured before captive use, were required to be accounted for in RG-1, and were dutiable at the stage of removal for captive consumption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>