<?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 (4) TMI 253 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91771</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, manufacturers of washers, rivets, &quot;chaplas&quot;, and &quot;pattis&quot;, who claimed exemption under Notification 175/86 for manufacturing gas lighters. Despite the department&#039;s assertion that the goods were component parts of lighters, the appellants argued they were articles of general use. The Tribunal considered the agreement between the association and the Collector on classification, determining the goods as parts of lighters. The Tribunal held that the demands were time-barred, as the appellants acted in good faith based on the agreed classification, thus setting aside the department&#039;s denial of exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:45:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 253 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91771</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, manufacturers of washers, rivets, &quot;chaplas&quot;, and &quot;pattis&quot;, who claimed exemption under Notification 175/86 for manufacturing gas lighters. Despite the department&#039;s assertion that the goods were component parts of lighters, the appellants argued they were articles of general use. The Tribunal considered the agreement between the association and the Collector on classification, determining the goods as parts of lighters. The Tribunal held that the demands were time-barred, as the appellants acted in good faith based on the agreed classification, thus setting aside the department&#039;s denial of exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>