<?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 (8) TMI 412 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119934</link>
    <description>Drawing wire from wire rod was treated as manufacture because the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2006 applied retrospectively to the relevant period and expressly covered that activity. As the show cause notices fell within the retrospectively covered period, the assessee had a strong prima facie case. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jul 2012 12:13:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156930" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 412 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119934</link>
      <description>Drawing wire from wire rod was treated as manufacture because the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2006 applied retrospectively to the relevant period and expressly covered that activity. As the show cause notices fell within the retrospectively covered period, the assessee had a strong prima facie case. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>