<?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>2006 (6) TMI 362 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119742</link>
    <description>Clearances of goods bearing another person&#039;s brand name, though ineligible for exemption under the notification, were excluded from the previous financial year&#039;s aggregate value for small-scale exemption eligibility because para 3A expressly removed such branded clearances where para 4 denied exemption. Para 3 governed exclusion for the current financial year&#039;s slab-based duty table, but para 3A controlled the computation of prior-year turnover. On that footing, the prior-year branded clearances were not includible in aggregate turnover, and the assessee was treated as having a prima facie case for exemption eligibility in the subsequent year, leading to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery at the interim stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:11:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156738" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 362 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119742</link>
      <description>Clearances of goods bearing another person&#039;s brand name, though ineligible for exemption under the notification, were excluded from the previous financial year&#039;s aggregate value for small-scale exemption eligibility because para 3A expressly removed such branded clearances where para 4 denied exemption. Para 3 governed exclusion for the current financial year&#039;s slab-based duty table, but para 3A controlled the computation of prior-year turnover. On that footing, the prior-year branded clearances were not includible in aggregate turnover, and the assessee was treated as having a prima facie case for exemption eligibility in the subsequent year, leading to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery at the interim stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119742</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>