<?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 426 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119952</link>
    <description>Stranding wire into a commercially distinct stranded wire with a different name, character and use was treated as manufacture because the end product was stronger, more useful and marketable; the authorities&#039; reliance on that principle was upheld, while cases on mere drawing or redrawing of wire were held inapplicable. The duty demand and extended limitation were sustained on the basis of the managing director&#039;s admission and corroborative records, which showed that the job-work explanation was not supported by accounts or challans. The penalty was nevertheless reduced in light of the overall circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jul 2012 12:50:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156948" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 426 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119952</link>
      <description>Stranding wire into a commercially distinct stranded wire with a different name, character and use was treated as manufacture because the end product was stronger, more useful and marketable; the authorities&#039; reliance on that principle was upheld, while cases on mere drawing or redrawing of wire were held inapplicable. The duty demand and extended limitation were sustained on the basis of the managing director&#039;s admission and corroborative records, which showed that the job-work explanation was not supported by accounts or challans. The penalty was nevertheless reduced in light of the overall circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>