<?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 (4) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94717</link>
    <description>Printing and slitting cork tipping based paper was examined on whether the process amounted to manufacture under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal relied on an earlier decision holding that the same activity did not constitute manufacture and, on that basis, found a prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of the assessees for stay purposes. The stay applications were allowed unconditionally, with waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 12:25:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94717</link>
      <description>Printing and slitting cork tipping based paper was examined on whether the process amounted to manufacture under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal relied on an earlier decision holding that the same activity did not constitute manufacture and, on that basis, found a prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of the assessees for stay purposes. The stay applications were allowed unconditionally, with waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94717</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>