<?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 (12) TMI 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87690</link>
    <description>Rubber lining or anti-corrosive treatment of tanks was held not to amount to manufacture because the process did not produce a new and distinct commercially known product; the tanks remained tanks after treatment. As manufacture was not established, the excise duty demand failed. The extended limitation period was also found unsustainable because the assessee&#039;s view that the activity was not excisable was treated as bona fide. On the same reasoning, confiscation of plant, machinery, building and land, and the penalty, could not survive. The absence of a clear classification finding further weakened the case against the assessee, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:25:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124756" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 203 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87690</link>
      <description>Rubber lining or anti-corrosive treatment of tanks was held not to amount to manufacture because the process did not produce a new and distinct commercially known product; the tanks remained tanks after treatment. As manufacture was not established, the excise duty demand failed. The extended limitation period was also found unsustainable because the assessee&#039;s view that the activity was not excisable was treated as bona fide. On the same reasoning, confiscation of plant, machinery, building and land, and the penalty, could not survive. The absence of a clear classification finding further weakened the case against the assessee, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>