<?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 208 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91732</link>
    <description>Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 311/86 depended on technical literature said to have been obtained from the manufacturer. Because the relevant documents had not been placed before the lower authorities and were considered necessary to test compliance with the notification conditions, the appellate forum held that the claim required fresh examination. The appellant was to be given an opportunity to produce the material and substantiate eligibility before reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for re-adjudication after hearing the appellant and considering the additional evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:03:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128794" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 208 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91732</link>
      <description>Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 311/86 depended on technical literature said to have been obtained from the manufacturer. Because the relevant documents had not been placed before the lower authorities and were considered necessary to test compliance with the notification conditions, the appellate forum held that the claim required fresh examination. The appellant was to be given an opportunity to produce the material and substantiate eligibility before reconsideration. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for re-adjudication after hearing the appellant and considering the additional evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>