<?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 498 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95584</link>
    <description>An exemption notification allowing a manufacturer to opt out of the benefit can bind the assessee for the remainder of the financial year once that election is made. Here, the assessee had filed its classification list and declaration choosing not to avail Notification No. 1/93-C.E., so it could not later claim the same exemption for subsequent clearances in that year. The relied-upon authorities were distinguished because they did not involve an express bar on changing the option after election. A separate dispute on the applicable rate of duty was left undecided because the relevant adjudication order was not before the authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:57:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 498 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95584</link>
      <description>An exemption notification allowing a manufacturer to opt out of the benefit can bind the assessee for the remainder of the financial year once that election is made. Here, the assessee had filed its classification list and declaration choosing not to avail Notification No. 1/93-C.E., so it could not later claim the same exemption for subsequent clearances in that year. The relied-upon authorities were distinguished because they did not involve an express bar on changing the option after election. A separate dispute on the applicable rate of duty was left undecided because the relevant adjudication order was not before the authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>