<?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 (5) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91025</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi considered whether the process of slitting, cutting, rewinding, and packing jumbo rolls of aluminum foils to produce &#039;house foils&#039; amounts to manufacture under the Central Excise Tariff. After reviewing the arguments and records, the Tribunal found that the resulting &#039;house foils&#039; had a unique market identity distinct from the original material. Applying the test of new identity and market recognition, the Tribunal concluded that the process constituted manufacture. Consequently, the order-in-appeal was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:56:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91025</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi considered whether the process of slitting, cutting, rewinding, and packing jumbo rolls of aluminum foils to produce &#039;house foils&#039; amounts to manufacture under the Central Excise Tariff. After reviewing the arguments and records, the Tribunal found that the resulting &#039;house foils&#039; had a unique market identity distinct from the original material. Applying the test of new identity and market recognition, the Tribunal concluded that the process constituted manufacture. Consequently, the order-in-appeal was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>