<?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 207 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87694</link>
    <description>Mixed Xylene cleared under a concessional exemption remained ineligible where the material was merely repacked into smaller drums and transferred to another factory without any manufacturing process. The notification applied only when the authority was satisfied that the goods were intended for use as a solvent, diluent or thinner in the manufacture of paints, varnishes, lacquers or allied materials, and that essential condition was not met on the admitted facts. The precedent relied on was distinguished because it involved a process that resulted in thinner, whereas here the goods were cleared as such. The concessional exemption was therefore denied, and the demand and penalty were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124760" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 207 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87694</link>
      <description>Mixed Xylene cleared under a concessional exemption remained ineligible where the material was merely repacked into smaller drums and transferred to another factory without any manufacturing process. The notification applied only when the authority was satisfied that the goods were intended for use as a solvent, diluent or thinner in the manufacture of paints, varnishes, lacquers or allied materials, and that essential condition was not met on the admitted facts. The precedent relied on was distinguished because it involved a process that resulted in thinner, whereas here the goods were cleared as such. The concessional exemption was therefore denied, and the demand and penalty were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87694</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>