<?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>1998 (7) TMI 196 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89123</link>
    <description>Notification No. 43/88 exempted phosphorous trichloride when it was used in the manufacture of goods falling under sub-heading 3808.10, and Chapter X procedure applied where the material moved through another use. The exemption was held to extend to use through the intermediate product trimethyl phosphite, because that intermediate was itself used to manufacture insecticides and pesticides under sub-heading 3808.10. The prior view in the assessee&#039;s own case had already treated denial of relief merely because the product reached the final goods through an intermediate as inconsistent with the Notification&#039;s object. The benefit of the Notification was therefore available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:44:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 196 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89123</link>
      <description>Notification No. 43/88 exempted phosphorous trichloride when it was used in the manufacture of goods falling under sub-heading 3808.10, and Chapter X procedure applied where the material moved through another use. The exemption was held to extend to use through the intermediate product trimethyl phosphite, because that intermediate was itself used to manufacture insecticides and pesticides under sub-heading 3808.10. The prior view in the assessee&#039;s own case had already treated denial of relief merely because the product reached the final goods through an intermediate as inconsistent with the Notification&#039;s object. The benefit of the Notification was therefore available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89123</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>