<?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 (7) TMI 514 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116487</link>
    <description>Folding of cotton fabrics through grooved rollers was held to be only a packing convenience and not calendering or manufacture, because no new product came into existence. The rollers were treated as incidental to packing rather than a legal calendering process. As the fabrics had not undergone manufacture, the exemption under the relevant notifications remained available and the duty demand could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:43:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 514 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116487</link>
      <description>Folding of cotton fabrics through grooved rollers was held to be only a packing convenience and not calendering or manufacture, because no new product came into existence. The rollers were treated as incidental to packing rather than a legal calendering process. As the fabrics had not undergone manufacture, the exemption under the relevant notifications remained available and the duty demand could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116487</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>