<?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>1997 (6) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86859</link>
    <description>Clearances of excisable goods fully exempted under Notification No. 46/81 could not be included in computing the clearance value threshold under Notification No. 77/85-C.E., because Explanation II(a) excluded goods exempted from the whole of duty under another Rule 8(1) notification unless that earlier exemption itself depended on annual value or quantity of clearances. The exemption under Notification No. 46/81 was unconditional as to clearance value, so the exclusion applied. The argument that &quot;factory&quot; should be read by reference to the Factories Act was rejected; the term had to be understood from the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and the notification scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:03:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123926" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (6) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86859</link>
      <description>Clearances of excisable goods fully exempted under Notification No. 46/81 could not be included in computing the clearance value threshold under Notification No. 77/85-C.E., because Explanation II(a) excluded goods exempted from the whole of duty under another Rule 8(1) notification unless that earlier exemption itself depended on annual value or quantity of clearances. The exemption under Notification No. 46/81 was unconditional as to clearance value, so the exclusion applied. The argument that &quot;factory&quot; should be read by reference to the Factories Act was rejected; the term had to be understood from the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and the notification scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>