<?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 (11) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87448</link>
    <description>Exemption notifications must be strictly construed, and relief cannot be extended beyond the specific product named in the text. Here, the tariff treated slag wool and rock wool as distinct expressions, and the notification granted exemption only to rock wool. Technically similar or synonymous goods could not be treated as interchangeable for exemption purposes. The result was that slag wool remained outside the scope of the notification, and the denial of exemption was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 11:14:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (11) TMI 164 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87448</link>
      <description>Exemption notifications must be strictly construed, and relief cannot be extended beyond the specific product named in the text. Here, the tariff treated slag wool and rock wool as distinct expressions, and the notification granted exemption only to rock wool. Technically similar or synonymous goods could not be treated as interchangeable for exemption purposes. The result was that slag wool remained outside the scope of the notification, and the denial of exemption was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>