<?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 (5) TMI 170 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86960</link>
    <description>Basic slag classifiable under Chapter 31 qualified for fertilizer exemption because the evidence showed it was used as a phosphatic fertilizer in crop production. The Revenue&#039;s characterisation of the product as a soil conditioner did not defeat the exemption, since the notification covered products used as fertilizer and the record supported that use. The exemption under Notification No. 181/86-C.E., as amended, was therefore available, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:03:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 170 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86960</link>
      <description>Basic slag classifiable under Chapter 31 qualified for fertilizer exemption because the evidence showed it was used as a phosphatic fertilizer in crop production. The Revenue&#039;s characterisation of the product as a soil conditioner did not defeat the exemption, since the notification covered products used as fertilizer and the record supported that use. The exemption under Notification No. 181/86-C.E., as amended, was therefore available, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>