<?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>1978 (1) TMI 164 - APPELLATE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165624</link>
    <description>Cutting and polishing rough diamonds was treated as not amounting to manufacture because the process did not change the character or constitution of the diamonds and no new commodity emerged. On that same basis, the resulting cut and polished diamonds were held not to fall within Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. The assessee was therefore entitled to relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2014 11:51:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (1) TMI 164 - APPELLATE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165624</link>
      <description>Cutting and polishing rough diamonds was treated as not amounting to manufacture because the process did not change the character or constitution of the diamonds and no new commodity emerged. On that same basis, the resulting cut and polished diamonds were held not to fall within Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. The assessee was therefore entitled to relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>