<?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 577 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115836</link>
    <description>For cut tobacco cleared under Chapter X Procedure, an input-output norm based on the number of cigarettes producible from one kilogram of cut tobacco could not be tested by adding the weight of tissue paper in the finished cigarettes. The declared consumption ratio and the Revenue&#039;s pilot tests both measured tobacco consumption by cigarette count, so the gross weight of cigarettes was not relevant to the norm. On that basis, tissue paper could not be used to allege short consumption or sustain a duty demand. The reasoning followed the assessee&#039;s earlier case on similar facts, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:24:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152834" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 577 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115836</link>
      <description>For cut tobacco cleared under Chapter X Procedure, an input-output norm based on the number of cigarettes producible from one kilogram of cut tobacco could not be tested by adding the weight of tissue paper in the finished cigarettes. The declared consumption ratio and the Revenue&#039;s pilot tests both measured tobacco consumption by cigarette count, so the gross weight of cigarettes was not relevant to the norm. On that basis, tissue paper could not be used to allege short consumption or sustain a duty demand. The reasoning followed the assessee&#039;s earlier case on similar facts, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>