<?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 (11) TMI 644 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218629</link>
    <description>Composite textile mills remained eligible for the concessional exemption under Notification No. 14/2002-C.E. for grey processed fabric even though captive consumption of cotton yarn and base fabric was exempt under Notification No. 22/96-CE. The Tribunal held that the requirement of payment of appropriate duty was satisfied where the duty payable, read with the applicable exemption, was nil, and that the intermediate exemption did not defeat the later notification&#039;s benefit. Relying on the Board circular and consistent treatment of similarly placed units, it found the contrary departmental view unsustainable and upheld the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 644 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218629</link>
      <description>Composite textile mills remained eligible for the concessional exemption under Notification No. 14/2002-C.E. for grey processed fabric even though captive consumption of cotton yarn and base fabric was exempt under Notification No. 22/96-CE. The Tribunal held that the requirement of payment of appropriate duty was satisfied where the duty payable, read with the applicable exemption, was nil, and that the intermediate exemption did not defeat the later notification&#039;s benefit. Relying on the Board circular and consistent treatment of similarly placed units, it found the contrary departmental view unsustainable and upheld the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218629</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>