<?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 (5) TMI 516 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97887</link>
    <description>Where the original adjudication omits material evidence on manufacture, exemption and the nature of the final goods, the findings cannot be sustained on the existing record. Additional processes such as drilling, bolting and finish painting raised an unresolved question whether castings ceased to remain castings and became a different marketable commodity, so exemption could not be finally decided. Allegations that bought-out items and branded components formed part of the supply also required factual examination to determine whether the activity was mere job work or manufacture of a distinct branded product. The matter was therefore remanded for de novo adjudication on the foundational issues affecting duty, penalty, exemption and limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:50:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134944" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 516 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97887</link>
      <description>Where the original adjudication omits material evidence on manufacture, exemption and the nature of the final goods, the findings cannot be sustained on the existing record. Additional processes such as drilling, bolting and finish painting raised an unresolved question whether castings ceased to remain castings and became a different marketable commodity, so exemption could not be finally decided. Allegations that bought-out items and branded components formed part of the supply also required factual examination to determine whether the activity was mere job work or manufacture of a distinct branded product. The matter was therefore remanded for de novo adjudication on the foundational issues affecting duty, penalty, exemption and limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97887</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>