<?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>2011 (8) TMI 641 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210439</link>
    <description>Printing on polyethylene coated paper, paper and PVC films was held to amount to manufacture where the printing was not merely incidental to packing but gave the articles a distinct identity, new name and different end use. Because the printed wrappers and labels carried trade names, logos, statutory particulars and product information, they were treated as products of the printing industry rather than as unprinted packing material. On that classification, the duty demands, interest and penalties could not survive, and the extended period of limitation was also held unavailable in this tariff-interpretation dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2017 13:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 641 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210439</link>
      <description>Printing on polyethylene coated paper, paper and PVC films was held to amount to manufacture where the printing was not merely incidental to packing but gave the articles a distinct identity, new name and different end use. Because the printed wrappers and labels carried trade names, logos, statutory particulars and product information, they were treated as products of the printing industry rather than as unprinted packing material. On that classification, the duty demands, interest and penalties could not survive, and the extended period of limitation was also held unavailable in this tariff-interpretation dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210439</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>