<?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 (1) TMI 342 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90590</link>
    <description>Small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was available only to factories meeting the specified paragraph 4 conditions and the proviso relating to earlier-year notifications. The appellant did not satisfy those requirements because it was not registered as a small scale industry with the Director of Industries or the Development Commissioner, its clearances exceeded the prescribed limit, and it had not actually availed the relevant preceding-year exemption under Notification No. 77/85-C.E. The notification was applied strictly, and the exemption could not be extended on the basis of assumptions or a deemed prior benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:58:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (1) TMI 342 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90590</link>
      <description>Small scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was available only to factories meeting the specified paragraph 4 conditions and the proviso relating to earlier-year notifications. The appellant did not satisfy those requirements because it was not registered as a small scale industry with the Director of Industries or the Development Commissioner, its clearances exceeded the prescribed limit, and it had not actually availed the relevant preceding-year exemption under Notification No. 77/85-C.E. The notification was applied strictly, and the exemption could not be extended on the basis of assumptions or a deemed prior benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>