<?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 (8) TMI 267 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88947</link>
    <description>Burnt pot lining scrap arising as rubbish in the course of manufacture was held not excisable because the Revenue failed to prove commercial marketability. The mere fact that the scrap had some sale value did not establish that it was known in the market as a raw material for cryolite or otherwise marketable. As marketability was not proved, the proposed classification under Tariff Heading 2804.90 and the consequential duty demand could not stand. The appeals succeeded and the assessee obtained consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 13:36:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 267 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88947</link>
      <description>Burnt pot lining scrap arising as rubbish in the course of manufacture was held not excisable because the Revenue failed to prove commercial marketability. The mere fact that the scrap had some sale value did not establish that it was known in the market as a raw material for cryolite or otherwise marketable. As marketability was not proved, the proposed classification under Tariff Heading 2804.90 and the consequential duty demand could not stand. The appeals succeeded and the assessee obtained consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>