<?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>1999 (2) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90264</link>
    <description>Assembly of duty-paid video magnetic tapes in pancake form and separately assessed plastic casings into video cassettes did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal applied an earlier decision on similar assembly activity and distinguished the Revenue&#039;s cited cases as factually different, leading to rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 17:05:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (2) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90264</link>
      <description>Assembly of duty-paid video magnetic tapes in pancake form and separately assessed plastic casings into video cassettes did not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal applied an earlier decision on similar assembly activity and distinguished the Revenue&#039;s cited cases as factually different, leading to rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90264</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>