<?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>1999 (6) TMI 455 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109119</link>
    <description>Nickel perforated rotary screens/cylinders were not covered by the cited central excise exemption notifications for the period 1-12-1990 to 30-4-1991. Notification No. 201/87-C.E. applied to printing frames, but these goods were not printing frames. Notification No. 64/86-C.E. applied to engraved copper rollers or cylinders for textile use, whereas the goods were neither copper rollers nor copper cylinders. The specific exemption for nickel perforated cylinder/screens came only under Notification No. 67/91-C.E., effective from 25-7-1991, after the relevant period. No other applicable exemption was shown, so the demand was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:51:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 455 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109119</link>
      <description>Nickel perforated rotary screens/cylinders were not covered by the cited central excise exemption notifications for the period 1-12-1990 to 30-4-1991. Notification No. 201/87-C.E. applied to printing frames, but these goods were not printing frames. Notification No. 64/86-C.E. applied to engraved copper rollers or cylinders for textile use, whereas the goods were neither copper rollers nor copper cylinders. The specific exemption for nickel perforated cylinder/screens came only under Notification No. 67/91-C.E., effective from 25-7-1991, after the relevant period. No other applicable exemption was shown, so the demand was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109119</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>