<?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 (11) TMI 133 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92322</link>
    <description>An exemption notification covering specified inputs used as feed stock in manufacture was construed to apply to furnace oil and heavy petroleum stock used to generate steam, because steam generation formed an integral part of the fertilizer manufacturing process and the inputs qualified for the relief. The same exemption did not extend to heavy petroleum stock and furnace oil used in the manufacture of methanol to the extent the methanol was sent outside the factory unit, because the notification protected the covered input use within the contemplated manufacturing purpose and not downstream diversion beyond the unit. The exemption was therefore available for the steam-generation use but denied for the diverted methanol use.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:31:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 133 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92322</link>
      <description>An exemption notification covering specified inputs used as feed stock in manufacture was construed to apply to furnace oil and heavy petroleum stock used to generate steam, because steam generation formed an integral part of the fertilizer manufacturing process and the inputs qualified for the relief. The same exemption did not extend to heavy petroleum stock and furnace oil used in the manufacture of methanol to the extent the methanol was sent outside the factory unit, because the notification protected the covered input use within the contemplated manufacturing purpose and not downstream diversion beyond the unit. The exemption was therefore available for the steam-generation use but denied for the diverted methanol use.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>