<?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>1983 (2) TMI 280 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165978</link>
    <description>Crushing and sieving low-grade pyrites did not amount to manufacture because the process did not create a new product and the material retained the same chemical composition, only its form changed; excise duty under Tariff Item 68 therefore was not attracted. The premises used for that processing were not a factory under the Factories Act because no manufacturing process occurred, and they were treated as part of the mine under the Mines Act because the activity was carried on adjacent to the mine for preparing the mineral for sale. The appellate order was affirmed, the excise proceedings were set aside, and the stay was vacated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:27:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363517" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (2) TMI 280 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165978</link>
      <description>Crushing and sieving low-grade pyrites did not amount to manufacture because the process did not create a new product and the material retained the same chemical composition, only its form changed; excise duty under Tariff Item 68 therefore was not attracted. The premises used for that processing were not a factory under the Factories Act because no manufacturing process occurred, and they were treated as part of the mine under the Mines Act because the activity was carried on adjacent to the mine for preparing the mineral for sale. The appellate order was affirmed, the excise proceedings were set aside, and the stay was vacated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165978</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>