<?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>2008 (12) TMI 684 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163232</link>
    <description>Cement cleared in 50 kg packs to Government companies, construction companies and other industrial or institutional consumers was treated as eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2006-CE. The absence of retail sale price markings was not accepted as a ground to deny the notification where the buyers were industrial or institutional consumers. The Tribunal relied on its earlier view and the Board&#039;s clarification, holding that the nature of the buyers, rather than the packaging format alone, was the relevant consideration. The notification benefit was held admissible and the duty demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2017 09:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 684 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163232</link>
      <description>Cement cleared in 50 kg packs to Government companies, construction companies and other industrial or institutional consumers was treated as eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 4/2006-CE. The absence of retail sale price markings was not accepted as a ground to deny the notification where the buyers were industrial or institutional consumers. The Tribunal relied on its earlier view and the Board&#039;s clarification, holding that the nature of the buyers, rather than the packaging format alone, was the relevant consideration. The notification benefit was held admissible and the duty demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>