<?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 (10) TMI 631 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205732</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification No. 63/95-C.E. was extended to clearances routed through BEML for the Ministry of Defence, even though the appellants were not job workers and did not make direct supply to the Ministry. The Tribunal applied an earlier coordinate decision granting the same exemption on materially similar facts under the predecessor notification, and treated that ratio as fully applicable. The denial of exemption was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179234" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 631 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205732</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification No. 63/95-C.E. was extended to clearances routed through BEML for the Ministry of Defence, even though the appellants were not job workers and did not make direct supply to the Ministry. The Tribunal applied an earlier coordinate decision granting the same exemption on materially similar facts under the predecessor notification, and treated that ratio as fully applicable. The denial of exemption was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>