<?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>2012 (10) TMI 225 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217276</link>
    <description>Exemption notifications must be complied with strictly, and an assessee cannot claim their benefit by stretching the terms or ignoring express conditions. Here, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the appellant&#039;s label used a brand name in the same manner as another manufacturer&#039;s label meant the notification conditions were not satisfied. On that basis, the exemption was denied and the consequential penalty was sustained. The legal position applied was that a claimant to exemption must establish full compliance with the notification, and where the brand-name condition is breached on the facts, relief is unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 225 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217276</link>
      <description>Exemption notifications must be complied with strictly, and an assessee cannot claim their benefit by stretching the terms or ignoring express conditions. Here, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the appellant&#039;s label used a brand name in the same manner as another manufacturer&#039;s label meant the notification conditions were not satisfied. On that basis, the exemption was denied and the consequential penalty was sustained. The legal position applied was that a claimant to exemption must establish full compliance with the notification, and where the brand-name condition is breached on the facts, relief is unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217276</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>