<?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 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86994</link>
    <description>Mosilit Heating Elements were held entitled to the customs exemption available for Super Kanthal Heating Elements because competent certificates showed both products were technically identical, made of the same chemical composition and used for the same high-temperature furnace application. A mere difference in trade name could not defeat the exemption once the notification&#039;s substantive conditions and certification requirements were satisfied. Although exemption notifications must be construed strictly, benefit cannot be denied on a nominal distinction where product identity is established. The denial of exemption solely on the basis of different trade names was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:43:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124061" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86994</link>
      <description>Mosilit Heating Elements were held entitled to the customs exemption available for Super Kanthal Heating Elements because competent certificates showed both products were technically identical, made of the same chemical composition and used for the same high-temperature furnace application. A mere difference in trade name could not defeat the exemption once the notification&#039;s substantive conditions and certification requirements were satisfied. Although exemption notifications must be construed strictly, benefit cannot be denied on a nominal distinction where product identity is established. The denial of exemption solely on the basis of different trade names was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>