<?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 (10) TMI 242 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92561</link>
    <description>Compliance with an exemption notification was satisfied where yarn was paid for through demand drafts or pay orders procured against cheques drawn on the registered co-operative society&#039;s bank account. The Tribunal treated this as substantial compliance with the requirement that payment be made by cheque from the society&#039;s account, and held that the form of remittance did not defeat the exemption when the underlying source of funds was the society&#039;s account. Alleged subsequent transfer or sale of the yarn was not a condition in the notification and could not be imported to deny relief. The exemption was upheld and the demand and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:20:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129622" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 242 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92561</link>
      <description>Compliance with an exemption notification was satisfied where yarn was paid for through demand drafts or pay orders procured against cheques drawn on the registered co-operative society&#039;s bank account. The Tribunal treated this as substantial compliance with the requirement that payment be made by cheque from the society&#039;s account, and held that the form of remittance did not defeat the exemption when the underlying source of funds was the society&#039;s account. Alleged subsequent transfer or sale of the yarn was not a condition in the notification and could not be imported to deny relief. The exemption was upheld and the demand and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92561</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>