<?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 (1) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91324</link>
    <description>Precipitated barium sulphate (Blanc Fixe) was treated as covered by the exemption entry in Notification No. 23/55 dated 29-4-1955, even though it was not expressly named. The Tribunal relied on an earlier decision in the assessee&#039;s own case on the same question and followed that view. On that basis, the exemption benefit was held admissible for the product.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:07:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 170 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91324</link>
      <description>Precipitated barium sulphate (Blanc Fixe) was treated as covered by the exemption entry in Notification No. 23/55 dated 29-4-1955, even though it was not expressly named. The Tribunal relied on an earlier decision in the assessee&#039;s own case on the same question and followed that view. On that basis, the exemption benefit was held admissible for the product.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>