<?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 (9) TMI 404 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116595</link>
    <description>Goods manufactured by bonding paper with HDPE fabric using liquid LDPE and then passing the product through rollers under pressure were treated as goods &quot;compressed together in one or more operations&quot; and therefore fell within the exclusion from concessional duty under the relevant exemption notifications. The denial of concessional duty under Notifications No. 20/94-C.E. and 18/95-C.E. was upheld. Where duty had been confirmed on the entire realisation, however, the duty demand had to be reworked after extending cum-duty benefit. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority solely for re-quantification of the demand on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:15:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 404 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116595</link>
      <description>Goods manufactured by bonding paper with HDPE fabric using liquid LDPE and then passing the product through rollers under pressure were treated as goods &quot;compressed together in one or more operations&quot; and therefore fell within the exclusion from concessional duty under the relevant exemption notifications. The denial of concessional duty under Notifications No. 20/94-C.E. and 18/95-C.E. was upheld. Where duty had been confirmed on the entire realisation, however, the duty demand had to be reworked after extending cum-duty benefit. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority solely for re-quantification of the demand on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>