<?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 (8) TMI 274 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166646</link>
    <description>A later exemption notification issued under Rule 8(1) may validly modify or qualify an earlier exemption, and the two instruments must be read together. On that construction, the Tribunal treated the second proviso to Notification No. 14/76 as making the earlier exemption under Notification No. 97/70 unavailable to metal containers cleared under the physical control procedure. It also noted that the assessee could have adopted the simplified procedure but did not do so, leaving duty liability to be assessed under the physical control regime. The result stated in the text is that the exemption was denied and the duty demand was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:14:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (8) TMI 274 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166646</link>
      <description>A later exemption notification issued under Rule 8(1) may validly modify or qualify an earlier exemption, and the two instruments must be read together. On that construction, the Tribunal treated the second proviso to Notification No. 14/76 as making the earlier exemption under Notification No. 97/70 unavailable to metal containers cleared under the physical control procedure. It also noted that the assessee could have adopted the simplified procedure but did not do so, leaving duty liability to be assessed under the physical control regime. The result stated in the text is that the exemption was denied and the duty demand was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166646</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>