<?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>1985 (4) TMI 311 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167507</link>
    <description>Recording sound on magnetic tape or cassette was treated as manufacture of excisable goods under Item 59 where the goods were marketable as a class, and customer-specific use or absence of labels did not defeat excisability. The exemption under Notification No. 102/82-C.E. was confined to recorded articles made from customer-supplied media that were not intended for sale or sales promotion, so eligible relief had to be recomputed for that limited category. Suppression of manufacturing and clearance activity attracted the extended limitation period, and penalties on the manufacturer-appellants were sustained but reduced, while the penalty on Cadmas Internationals was deleted. A dissent held that mere recording on duty-paid tapes was not manufacture.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 311 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167507</link>
      <description>Recording sound on magnetic tape or cassette was treated as manufacture of excisable goods under Item 59 where the goods were marketable as a class, and customer-specific use or absence of labels did not defeat excisability. The exemption under Notification No. 102/82-C.E. was confined to recorded articles made from customer-supplied media that were not intended for sale or sales promotion, so eligible relief had to be recomputed for that limited category. Suppression of manufacturing and clearance activity attracted the extended limitation period, and penalties on the manufacturer-appellants were sustained but reduced, while the penalty on Cadmas Internationals was deleted. A dissent held that mere recording on duty-paid tapes was not manufacture.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>