<?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>2007 (10) TMI 528 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124355</link>
    <description>Waste and scrap of corrugated boxes arising from duty-paid inputs used in manufacture was not liable to duty merely because it was cleared as scrap. The exemption notification issue did not arise where no independent duty liability existed, and the assessee&#039;s consistent classification practice supported the claimed benefit. The appellate authority was also correct that such waste and scrap fell within Rule 57D. On these facts, the demand of duty and penalty was held unsustainable and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2012 12:49:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 528 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124355</link>
      <description>Waste and scrap of corrugated boxes arising from duty-paid inputs used in manufacture was not liable to duty merely because it was cleared as scrap. The exemption notification issue did not arise where no independent duty liability existed, and the assessee&#039;s consistent classification practice supported the claimed benefit. The appellate authority was also correct that such waste and scrap fell within Rule 57D. On these facts, the demand of duty and penalty was held unsustainable and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>