<?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>1998 (1) TMI 330 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94348</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal, determining that the processed items did not qualify as new goods for excisability purposes. The decision was based on the analysis of manufacturing processes, emphasizing that cutting and drilling activities did not amount to creating new goods. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling aligned with established legal principles and precedents, ultimately dismissing the appeal and cross-objections.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:39:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131408" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 330 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94348</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal, determining that the processed items did not qualify as new goods for excisability purposes. The decision was based on the analysis of manufacturing processes, emphasizing that cutting and drilling activities did not amount to creating new goods. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling aligned with established legal principles and precedents, ultimately dismissing the appeal and cross-objections.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>