<?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 618 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97733</link>
    <description>Soap noodles were treated as falling within the expression &quot;soap in any form&quot; for purposes of the money credit notifications, because the tariff entry and the notification both used the broader soap classification and the goods were accepted as soap in noodle form. The analysis emphasised that form or shape did not alter the essential character of the product where the entry was wide enough to include soap in any form, and that the manufacturing process leading to soap had been carried out in the factory. On that basis, the benefit of the notifications was available, and the denial of credit and consequential penalty were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:00:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134790" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 618 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97733</link>
      <description>Soap noodles were treated as falling within the expression &quot;soap in any form&quot; for purposes of the money credit notifications, because the tariff entry and the notification both used the broader soap classification and the goods were accepted as soap in noodle form. The analysis emphasised that form or shape did not alter the essential character of the product where the entry was wide enough to include soap in any form, and that the manufacturing process leading to soap had been carried out in the factory. On that basis, the benefit of the notifications was available, and the denial of credit and consequential penalty were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>