<?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 (5) TMI 274 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92365</link>
    <description>In excise classification, trade and commercial understanding of the product prevailed over a mere descriptive entry in the classification list. Film labels manufactured by the assessee were treated as tape because the authorities had found them to be relatively narrow films, and that factual finding was not effectively displaced by the Revenue. On that basis, the product qualified for the benefit of Notification No. 53/88 dated 1-3-1988, and the exemption position remained intact.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:13:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 274 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92365</link>
      <description>In excise classification, trade and commercial understanding of the product prevailed over a mere descriptive entry in the classification list. Film labels manufactured by the assessee were treated as tape because the authorities had found them to be relatively narrow films, and that factual finding was not effectively displaced by the Revenue. On that basis, the product qualified for the benefit of Notification No. 53/88 dated 1-3-1988, and the exemption position remained intact.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>