<?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 (11) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86185</link>
    <description>Hardened rice bran oil and inedible groundnut oil were treated as retaining their character as industrial oils despite hardening, so classification under Tariff Item 12 followed. Because Notification No. 115/75 applied only to goods falling under Tariff Item 68, the exemption could not be claimed once the goods were classified under Tariff Item 12. The notification was therefore unavailable, and no separate remand on exemption was necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:47:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123252" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (11) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86185</link>
      <description>Hardened rice bran oil and inedible groundnut oil were treated as retaining their character as industrial oils despite hardening, so classification under Tariff Item 12 followed. Because Notification No. 115/75 applied only to goods falling under Tariff Item 68, the exemption could not be claimed once the goods were classified under Tariff Item 12. The notification was therefore unavailable, and no separate remand on exemption was necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86185</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>