<?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>1982 (2) TMI 305 - CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165748</link>
    <description>Concessional duty under the fertilizer feedstock exemption applied to inputs consumed during a plant&#039;s trial run, because the manufacturing process was actually carried out during commissioning and the notification condition of use in manufacture was satisfied. The same concession also applied to petroleum products used to generate steam, as steam was an essential process input in the integrated fertilizer production chain. However, feedstock used to produce ammonia sold for chemical use, not fertilizer use, fell outside the exemption and duty recovery on that quantity required reconsideration. The penalty was held unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:34:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (2) TMI 305 - CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165748</link>
      <description>Concessional duty under the fertilizer feedstock exemption applied to inputs consumed during a plant&#039;s trial run, because the manufacturing process was actually carried out during commissioning and the notification condition of use in manufacture was satisfied. The same concession also applied to petroleum products used to generate steam, as steam was an essential process input in the integrated fertilizer production chain. However, feedstock used to produce ammonia sold for chemical use, not fertilizer use, fell outside the exemption and duty recovery on that quantity required reconsideration. The penalty was held unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>