<?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>2000 (2) TMI 235 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89450</link>
    <description>Insulated cables cleared for use in wind mills were examined for exemption as parts of wind mills under Notification No. 205/88-CE. The cables were used for transmission and distribution of electricity generated by the wind mill, but the wind mill was complete in itself without them. Because the cables did not constitute an identifiable part of the wind mill, and the cited precedent was distinguishable on facts, the exemption was held unavailable. The demand was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:23:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126512" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 235 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89450</link>
      <description>Insulated cables cleared for use in wind mills were examined for exemption as parts of wind mills under Notification No. 205/88-CE. The cables were used for transmission and distribution of electricity generated by the wind mill, but the wind mill was complete in itself without them. Because the cables did not constitute an identifiable part of the wind mill, and the cited precedent was distinguishable on facts, the exemption was held unavailable. The demand was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>