<?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>2000 (2) TMI 351 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93427</link>
    <description>Purification or refining of used lubricating oil does not amount to manufacture where the process does not change its essential character or create a new and distinct commercial commodity. The Tribunal applied earlier decisions holding that the same principle governed the present facts, so the basis for treating the process as manufacture and sustaining consequential duty liability could not stand. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:38:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 351 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93427</link>
      <description>Purification or refining of used lubricating oil does not amount to manufacture where the process does not change its essential character or create a new and distinct commercial commodity. The Tribunal applied earlier decisions holding that the same principle governed the present facts, so the basis for treating the process as manufacture and sustaining consequential duty liability could not stand. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>