<?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 (11) TMI 630 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102674</link>
    <description>Affixing design on nickel perforated cylinders was held not to amount to manufacture because the process merely reproduced the earlier tribunal view that designed cylinders from blank nickel perforated cylinders do not create a new product. The prior ratio, left undisturbed by the Supreme Court, was followed, with the result that no central excise duty was leviable on the process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:55:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139720" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 630 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102674</link>
      <description>Affixing design on nickel perforated cylinders was held not to amount to manufacture because the process merely reproduced the earlier tribunal view that designed cylinders from blank nickel perforated cylinders do not create a new product. The prior ratio, left undisturbed by the Supreme Court, was followed, with the result that no central excise duty was leviable on the process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>