<?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 (8) TMI 473 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94031</link>
    <description>Testing, inspection and packing of finished goods did not amount to manufacture where the actual job-work manufacturing was carried out by independent job workers. The Tribunal applied its earlier view that such post-manufacture activities, by themselves, do not make the appellants the manufacturers in law. As no manufacturing activity was undertaken by the appellants, the duty demand and penalties were held unsustainable and were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:30:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131091" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 473 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94031</link>
      <description>Testing, inspection and packing of finished goods did not amount to manufacture where the actual job-work manufacturing was carried out by independent job workers. The Tribunal applied its earlier view that such post-manufacture activities, by themselves, do not make the appellants the manufacturers in law. As no manufacturing activity was undertaken by the appellants, the duty demand and penalties were held unsustainable and were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>