<?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 (7) TMI 366 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167561</link>
    <description>Printed office files with tags or clips were held not to qualify as products of the printing industry for exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. because printing was not the culminating process of manufacture: the files remained fully usable as files without printing, and the brand name and description were only one step in their production. The claim based on Notification No. 179/77-C.E. was also not accepted on the facts found. A separate procedural objection based on absence of a separate show cause notice failed, as the record showed full opportunity of hearing, examination of samples, and no miscarriage of justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2014 16:33:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372061" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (7) TMI 366 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167561</link>
      <description>Printed office files with tags or clips were held not to qualify as products of the printing industry for exemption under Notification No. 55/75-C.E. because printing was not the culminating process of manufacture: the files remained fully usable as files without printing, and the brand name and description were only one step in their production. The claim based on Notification No. 179/77-C.E. was also not accepted on the facts found. A separate procedural objection based on absence of a separate show cause notice failed, as the record showed full opportunity of hearing, examination of samples, and no miscarriage of justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167561</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>