<?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>2004 (8) TMI 562 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114396</link>
    <description>Where the manufactured product is commercially and factually the same as a product earlier held eligible for exemption, the same notification benefit applies. The Tribunal treated the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling in Kedia Agglomerated Marbles as governing because the present product and manufacturing process were found to be similar, and the product was regarded in the market as Mosaic Tiles. On that basis, the claim for exemption under Notification No. 59/90-C.E. was accepted and the adverse order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 13:09:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 562 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114396</link>
      <description>Where the manufactured product is commercially and factually the same as a product earlier held eligible for exemption, the same notification benefit applies. The Tribunal treated the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling in Kedia Agglomerated Marbles as governing because the present product and manufacturing process were found to be similar, and the product was regarded in the market as Mosaic Tiles. On that basis, the claim for exemption under Notification No. 59/90-C.E. was accepted and the adverse order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>