<?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 407 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94298</link>
    <description>Balances with dual sensitivity were treated as meeting the exemption threshold under Notification No. 71/86-CE because their sensitivity was to be assessed by reference to the best sensitivity available under ambient physical conditions. The minimum weight sensitivity condition was not in dispute, and the legal metrology clarification supported classification on that basis. A later departmental technical opinion did not displace that clarification. On that reasoning, the balances fell within the notification and the exemption was available to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:39:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 407 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94298</link>
      <description>Balances with dual sensitivity were treated as meeting the exemption threshold under Notification No. 71/86-CE because their sensitivity was to be assessed by reference to the best sensitivity available under ambient physical conditions. The minimum weight sensitivity condition was not in dispute, and the legal metrology clarification supported classification on that basis. A later departmental technical opinion did not displace that clarification. On that reasoning, the balances fell within the notification and the exemption was available to 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=94298</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>