<?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 409 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116601</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the processes undertaken by the respondent constituted manufacturing, resulting in the production of dutiable goods. It was emphasized that the goods were cleared only after undergoing manufacturing processes, impacting the duty credit. The decision upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, highlighting the importance of understanding manufacturing processes in determining the dutiability of goods.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:57:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153599" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 409 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116601</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the processes undertaken by the respondent constituted manufacturing, resulting in the production of dutiable goods. It was emphasized that the goods were cleared only after undergoing manufacturing processes, impacting the duty credit. The decision upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order and dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, highlighting the importance of understanding manufacturing processes in determining the dutiability of goods.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116601</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>