<?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>2009 (1) TMI 627 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125776</link>
    <description>An exemption notification requiring a certificate from the Khadi and Village Industries Commission made production of that certificate the ative condition for relief. Once the competent authority issued and recognised the certificate, the revenue authorities could not independently re-examine whether the unit was a village industry, in a rural area, or had received the requisite assistance, because those matters were for the designated authority alone. Later production of the certificate did not defeat entitlement where the earlier certificate was treated as valid and supported by the Commission&#039;s clarification. The claimed exemption was therefore upheld and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2012 10:45:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 627 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125776</link>
      <description>An exemption notification requiring a certificate from the Khadi and Village Industries Commission made production of that certificate the ative condition for relief. Once the competent authority issued and recognised the certificate, the revenue authorities could not independently re-examine whether the unit was a village industry, in a rural area, or had received the requisite assistance, because those matters were for the designated authority alone. Later production of the certificate did not defeat entitlement where the earlier certificate was treated as valid and supported by the Commission&#039;s clarification. The claimed exemption was therefore upheld and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>