<?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 199 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86990</link>
    <description>Halogen lamps and xenon lamps were treated as covered by the specific entries in Notification No. 67/83-C.E. for vacuum and gas-filled bulbs, and the notification language was read in a broad sense to include bulbs and tubular lamps. Because the goods were reasonably covered by those specific entries, the residuary entry could not be invoked to deny exemption. The stated effect was that classification under the residuary entry was impermissible and the exemption treatment in favour of the assessee was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:30:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 199 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86990</link>
      <description>Halogen lamps and xenon lamps were treated as covered by the specific entries in Notification No. 67/83-C.E. for vacuum and gas-filled bulbs, and the notification language was read in a broad sense to include bulbs and tubular lamps. Because the goods were reasonably covered by those specific entries, the residuary entry could not be invoked to deny exemption. The stated effect was that classification under the residuary entry was impermissible and the exemption treatment in favour of the assessee was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86990</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>