<?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 198 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91722</link>
    <description>Notification No. 175/86 was interpreted as requiring only that the factory be registered with the Directorate of Industries in any State as a small scale unit, without any further condition that the SSI registration be commodity-specific. On that reading, goods manufactured for loan licencees remained eligible for exemption where the loan licencees were themselves registered SSI units in their respective States. Affixation of the loan licencee&#039;s brand name did not by itself disqualify the goods, and objections based on the place of registration did not sustain a duty demand. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed and the exemption remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:05:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 198 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91722</link>
      <description>Notification No. 175/86 was interpreted as requiring only that the factory be registered with the Directorate of Industries in any State as a small scale unit, without any further condition that the SSI registration be commodity-specific. On that reading, goods manufactured for loan licencees remained eligible for exemption where the loan licencees were themselves registered SSI units in their respective States. Affixation of the loan licencee&#039;s brand name did not by itself disqualify the goods, and objections based on the place of registration did not sustain a duty demand. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed and the exemption remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>