<?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>1993 (4) TMI 299 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158758</link>
    <description>Goods were treated as manufactured in the newly set-up unit where the registration scheme contemplated only the processing assigned to that unit and did not require every earlier stage, such as forging and cutting, to be completed in-house. The unit received forged rings and carried out machining into S.S. C.T.C. segments, which produced a distinct commercial commodity with a different trade identity and market use. As machining went beyond mere polishing and the finished goods attracted excise duty, the activity was held to amount to manufacture. On that basis, the eligibility certificate was directed to be issued and the tax-holiday refusal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 17:23:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (4) TMI 299 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158758</link>
      <description>Goods were treated as manufactured in the newly set-up unit where the registration scheme contemplated only the processing assigned to that unit and did not require every earlier stage, such as forging and cutting, to be completed in-house. The unit received forged rings and carried out machining into S.S. C.T.C. segments, which produced a distinct commercial commodity with a different trade identity and market use. As machining went beyond mere polishing and the finished goods attracted excise duty, the activity was held to amount to manufacture. On that basis, the eligibility certificate was directed to be issued and the tax-holiday refusal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>