https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110503 The Tribunal held that the appellant, despite disconnecting power and dismantling machinery, still possessed the necessary facilities for processes outlined in Notification No. 40/95. The Tribunal clarified that "having facility" referred to possession of machinery, not its operational status. As the appellant had not disposed of the equipment, they were considered ineligible for the exemption claimed. The appeal was unsuccessful, and the Tribunal rejected the appellant's claim for exemption under the notification during the specified period. en-us Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:58:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110503 The Tribunal held that the appellant, despite disconnecting power and dismantling machinery, still possessed the necessary facilities for processes outlined in Notification No. 40/95. The Tribunal clarified that "having facility" referred to possession of machinery, not its operational status. As the appellant had not disposed of the equipment, they were considered ineligible for the exemption claimed. The appeal was unsuccessful, and the Tribunal rejected the appellant's claim for exemption under the notification during the specified period. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110503