<?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 (8) TMI 209 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92187</link>
    <description>Girders used in constructing bridge spans were treated as prima facie not dutiable because they came into existence as immovable property. The Tribunal also considered the possible application of Notification No. 59/90 to goods manufactured at site and used in construction, relying on an earlier Tribunal ruling in a related context. On that basis, it found interim protection justified and granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty and penalty demands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:40:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 209 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92187</link>
      <description>Girders used in constructing bridge spans were treated as prima facie not dutiable because they came into existence as immovable property. The Tribunal also considered the possible application of Notification No. 59/90 to goods manufactured at site and used in construction, relying on an earlier Tribunal ruling in a related context. On that basis, it found interim protection justified and granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty and penalty demands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>