<?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 (12) TMI 438 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114772</link>
    <description>Captively manufactured intermediate plastic pouches and bags used in medical drainage sets were treated as classifiable under Heading 39.23 and covered by the relevant exemption notifications, including the notification already accepted in earlier proceedings and left undisturbed. The analysis notes that for part of the period the demand was based on a notification not then in force, while the governing exemption framework and binding Board circulars supported exemption for intermediate plastic products made from duty-paid material, even where manufacture was not continuous. On that basis, the duty demands were stated to be unsustainable and the show cause notices required setting aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 18:56:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 438 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114772</link>
      <description>Captively manufactured intermediate plastic pouches and bags used in medical drainage sets were treated as classifiable under Heading 39.23 and covered by the relevant exemption notifications, including the notification already accepted in earlier proceedings and left undisturbed. The analysis notes that for part of the period the demand was based on a notification not then in force, while the governing exemption framework and binding Board circulars supported exemption for intermediate plastic products made from duty-paid material, even where manufacture was not continuous. On that basis, the duty demands were stated to be unsustainable and the show cause notices required setting aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>