<?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 189 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91343</link>
    <description>Goods manufactured in a portion of a factory and used for lining furnaces were treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 281/86, because the notification was read purposively to cover goods made for repairing machinery used in the factory. The Tribunal held that, since the goods were admittedly used inside the factory for repair-related work, the manufacturing area could be regarded as a &quot;workshop&quot; for the exemption. As the term &quot;workshop&quot; was not defined, a part of the factory used for producing repair goods was sufficient to satisfy the notification. The exemption claim was therefore accepted and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:31:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 189 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91343</link>
      <description>Goods manufactured in a portion of a factory and used for lining furnaces were treated as eligible for exemption under Notification No. 281/86, because the notification was read purposively to cover goods made for repairing machinery used in the factory. The Tribunal held that, since the goods were admittedly used inside the factory for repair-related work, the manufacturing area could be regarded as a &quot;workshop&quot; for the exemption. As the term &quot;workshop&quot; was not defined, a part of the factory used for producing repair goods was sufficient to satisfy the notification. The exemption claim was therefore accepted and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>