<?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>2001 (1) TMI 391 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95430</link>
    <description>Oxygen moved through a pipeline within the manufacturer&#039;s factory was treated as oxygen supplied through pipeline under tariff entry 2804.12, because the entry did not require supply to an external purchaser and only required movement through a pipeline to a point different from the point of origin. Marketability was also found established, with comparable pipeline supplies by other manufacturers supporting that conclusion. Reliance on such material did not breach natural justice because the factual basis had emerged during the hearing and the assessee was not taken by surprise. The refund claim therefore could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:15:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 391 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95430</link>
      <description>Oxygen moved through a pipeline within the manufacturer&#039;s factory was treated as oxygen supplied through pipeline under tariff entry 2804.12, because the entry did not require supply to an external purchaser and only required movement through a pipeline to a point different from the point of origin. Marketability was also found established, with comparable pipeline supplies by other manufacturers supporting that conclusion. Reliance on such material did not breach natural justice because the factual basis had emerged during the hearing and the assessee was not taken by surprise. The refund claim therefore could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>