<?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 (7) TMI 1071 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128316</link>
    <description>A concessional exemption for naphtha used in fertilizer manufacture was upheld where carbon dioxide arose inevitably and technologically as a by-product of the chemical process, even though part of that gas was later used for ammonium bicarbonate, a non-fertilizer product. The operative use of the input was treated as manufacture of fertilizer or ammonia, so the exemption could not be denied on account of incidental diversion of the by-product. The extended period of limitation was also rejected because the manufacturing process and declarations had been disclosed, and the demand lacked legal basis. Interest and penalty fell with the underlying demand and were therefore not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 11:52:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165187" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1071 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128316</link>
      <description>A concessional exemption for naphtha used in fertilizer manufacture was upheld where carbon dioxide arose inevitably and technologically as a by-product of the chemical process, even though part of that gas was later used for ammonium bicarbonate, a non-fertilizer product. The operative use of the input was treated as manufacture of fertilizer or ammonia, so the exemption could not be denied on account of incidental diversion of the by-product. The extended period of limitation was also rejected because the manufacturing process and declarations had been disclosed, and the demand lacked legal basis. Interest and penalty fell with the underlying demand and were therefore not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>