<?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>2010 (9) TMI 317 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202073</link>
    <description>A printing machine supplied to an educational institution was treated as &quot;equipment&quot; for purposes of Notification No. 10/97-C.E. dated 1-3-97. The Tribunal rejected a narrow construction of the entry, noting that a lathe machine had previously been regarded as technical equipment within the same notification. On that basis, the exemption was held available to the assessee, and denial of the benefit was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 12:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175663" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 317 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202073</link>
      <description>A printing machine supplied to an educational institution was treated as &quot;equipment&quot; for purposes of Notification No. 10/97-C.E. dated 1-3-97. The Tribunal rejected a narrow construction of the entry, noting that a lathe machine had previously been regarded as technical equipment within the same notification. On that basis, the exemption was held available to the assessee, and denial of the benefit was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202073</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>