<?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 (3) TMI 424 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90636</link>
    <description>Stone crushing carried on in crushers situated adjacent to a quarry was treated as occurring within a mine for purposes of the exemption notification, because the notification adopted the meaning of &quot;mine&quot; from section 2(j) of the Mines Act, 1952. That inclusive definition extends to premises in or adjacent to, and belonging to, a mine where any process ancillary to the getting, dressing or preparation for sale of minerals is carried on. On those facts, the crushing area fell within the statutory ambit of the mine, and the exemption could not be denied merely because the process also resulted in a new commodity. The assessee was entitled to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 14:49:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127698" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 424 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90636</link>
      <description>Stone crushing carried on in crushers situated adjacent to a quarry was treated as occurring within a mine for purposes of the exemption notification, because the notification adopted the meaning of &quot;mine&quot; from section 2(j) of the Mines Act, 1952. That inclusive definition extends to premises in or adjacent to, and belonging to, a mine where any process ancillary to the getting, dressing or preparation for sale of minerals is carried on. On those facts, the crushing area fell within the statutory ambit of the mine, and the exemption could not be denied merely because the process also resulted in a new commodity. The assessee was entitled to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90636</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>