<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1105 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242890</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the earlier finding that red mud residue is not excisable goods despite an amendment to the definition, emphasizing the need to assess each product individually. The appellant was granted relief with a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay on collection during the appeal process. The decision highlights the importance of evaluating whether a residue qualifies as a manufactured product on a case-by-case basis, considering both manufacture and marketability aspects.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jan 2014 06:57:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343421" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1105 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242890</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the earlier finding that red mud residue is not excisable goods despite an amendment to the definition, emphasizing the need to assess each product individually. The appellant was granted relief with a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay on collection during the appeal process. The decision highlights the importance of evaluating whether a residue qualifies as a manufactured product on a case-by-case basis, considering both manufacture and marketability aspects.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242890</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>