<?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>2005 (5) TMI 416 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115465</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that steel trestles fabricated at a site for supporting pipelines were not considered manufactured goods for the purpose of Central Excise duty. The trestles were deemed part of permanent civil construction, designed for installation and not for sale as movable goods. The Tribunal referred to a dictionary definition of trestles to support its decision, ultimately setting aside the previous order and ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 17:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 416 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115465</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that steel trestles fabricated at a site for supporting pipelines were not considered manufactured goods for the purpose of Central Excise duty. The trestles were deemed part of permanent civil construction, designed for installation and not for sale as movable goods. The Tribunal referred to a dictionary definition of trestles to support its decision, ultimately setting aside the previous order and ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115465</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>