<?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>1998 (10) TMI 350 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102567</link>
    <description>Glass tubes arising in the manufacture of glass beads were treated as dutiable intermediate goods because the bead-making process was a downstream activity and the appellants had no facility to produce basic glass. The duty demand on the glass tubes was upheld. The penalty was also found excessive on the facts, and it was reduced substantially.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:25:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139613" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 350 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102567</link>
      <description>Glass tubes arising in the manufacture of glass beads were treated as dutiable intermediate goods because the bead-making process was a downstream activity and the appellants had no facility to produce basic glass. The duty demand on the glass tubes was upheld. The penalty was also found excessive on the facts, and it was reduced substantially.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>