<?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 (12) TMI 146 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219131</link>
    <description>An exemption notification for water-delivery pipes was construed to cover pipes used for delivery of water beyond the first storage point, up to later storage facilities, because the notification did not expressly restrict the benefit to the first storage point. The Tribunal followed earlier identical rulings and treated the issue as no longer res integra. On that interpretation, the exemption was available and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192501" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 146 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219131</link>
      <description>An exemption notification for water-delivery pipes was construed to cover pipes used for delivery of water beyond the first storage point, up to later storage facilities, because the notification did not expressly restrict the benefit to the first storage point. The Tribunal followed earlier identical rulings and treated the issue as no longer res integra. On that interpretation, the exemption was available and the denial of exemption was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>