<?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>1984 (1) TMI 317 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166856</link>
    <description>Paper one side coated with sodium benzoate and the other side waxed was treated as waxed paper for excise classification because the tariff entry covered paper subjected to coating and the notification extended concessional duty to waxed paper under that entry. The product was described in invoices as wax paper, and there was no evidence that the market knew it only as coated paper. The notification did not distinguish between one-sided and two-sided waxing, and the treatment also rendered the paper commercially different in name, character and use, satisfying the test of manufacture for excise purposes. The assessee was therefore entitled to the concession and consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 14:43:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (1) TMI 317 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166856</link>
      <description>Paper one side coated with sodium benzoate and the other side waxed was treated as waxed paper for excise classification because the tariff entry covered paper subjected to coating and the notification extended concessional duty to waxed paper under that entry. The product was described in invoices as wax paper, and there was no evidence that the market knew it only as coated paper. The notification did not distinguish between one-sided and two-sided waxing, and the treatment also rendered the paper commercially different in name, character and use, satisfying the test of manufacture for excise purposes. The assessee was therefore entitled to the concession and consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>