<?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 (12) TMI 659 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99375</link>
    <description>Small-scale industry registration remained valid because the registering authority had not cancelled it, and excise authorities could not deny Notification No. 175/86-C.E. merely for alleged non-compliance with filing requirements under another regime. The record also did not show that the unit had ceased to be a small-scale unit during the relevant period. On that basis, the exemption was available for the period in question, and the duty demand had to be re-quantified after giving effect to the notification benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:23:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 659 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99375</link>
      <description>Small-scale industry registration remained valid because the registering authority had not cancelled it, and excise authorities could not deny Notification No. 175/86-C.E. merely for alleged non-compliance with filing requirements under another regime. The record also did not show that the unit had ceased to be a small-scale unit during the relevant period. On that basis, the exemption was available for the period in question, and the duty demand had to be re-quantified after giving effect to the notification benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99375</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>