<?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 (11) TMI 728 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97680</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the classification and dutiability of various construction materials and structures. It was held that Pile Liners, Cutting Edges, Shuttering, Centering, Working Platform, and Water Tanks were deemed immovable properties and not excisable. The demands were considered time-barred, and there was no evidence of intent to evade duty. The tribunal also found that the items in question were custom-made for specific contracts and not standard marketable products, further supporting the non-excisability of the items. As a result, the appeals were allowed, and consequential relief was granted to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:32:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 728 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97680</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the classification and dutiability of various construction materials and structures. It was held that Pile Liners, Cutting Edges, Shuttering, Centering, Working Platform, and Water Tanks were deemed immovable properties and not excisable. The demands were considered time-barred, and there was no evidence of intent to evade duty. The tribunal also found that the items in question were custom-made for specific contracts and not standard marketable products, further supporting the non-excisability of the items. As a result, the appeals were allowed, and consequential relief was granted to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>