<?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 (12) TMI 160 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89657</link>
    <description>Conditional exemption under Notification No. 75/86 applied only to filter inserts and elements intended for direct use in the manufacture of internal combustion engines, with Chapter X procedure forming an integral condition to ensure that use at clearance. Goods sent first to another unit for manufacture of filter assemblies, and only later moved under Chapter X, did not satisfy the notification because the phrase &quot;intended for use&quot; could not extend to indirect or intermediate use through a separate product. The cited precedent was distinguished since the goods there reached the actual end-user manufacturer under Chapter X. The exemption was therefore unavailable and the demand was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:06:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126719" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (12) TMI 160 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89657</link>
      <description>Conditional exemption under Notification No. 75/86 applied only to filter inserts and elements intended for direct use in the manufacture of internal combustion engines, with Chapter X procedure forming an integral condition to ensure that use at clearance. Goods sent first to another unit for manufacture of filter assemblies, and only later moved under Chapter X, did not satisfy the notification because the phrase &quot;intended for use&quot; could not extend to indirect or intermediate use through a separate product. The cited precedent was distinguished since the goods there reached the actual end-user manufacturer under Chapter X. The exemption was therefore unavailable and the demand was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>