<?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 306 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88082</link>
    <description>Brass slabs, strips and foils manufactured by adding zinc were treated as eligible for exemption under the relevant central excise notifications because the notification wording was materially similar to an earlier Tribunal construction covering comparable products made from old scrap with additions such as zinc and tin. The departmental objection did not displace that interpretation, so the exemption claim succeeded. The separate question whether Modvat credit had been availed on the inputs remained factually unresolved; it was remanded for fresh determination after giving the respondents an opportunity to be heard, with no final merits finding on that issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:42:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 306 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88082</link>
      <description>Brass slabs, strips and foils manufactured by adding zinc were treated as eligible for exemption under the relevant central excise notifications because the notification wording was materially similar to an earlier Tribunal construction covering comparable products made from old scrap with additions such as zinc and tin. The departmental objection did not displace that interpretation, so the exemption claim succeeded. The separate question whether Modvat credit had been availed on the inputs remained factually unresolved; it was remanded for fresh determination after giving the respondents an opportunity to be heard, with no final merits finding on that issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>