<?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>2015 (4) TMI 247 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258365</link>
    <description>Signages assembled at a factory, dismantled for transport, and re-erected at petrol bunk sites were treated as movable excisable goods because they could be detached and shifted without losing identity, even though fixed on concrete foundations by bolts. The Court held that the dispute was predominantly factual and that site erection did not make the signages immovable property. A Board circular on non-dutiability of immovable final products in CKD or unassembled form did not assist the assessee because the signages were found to be movable. Duty demand and connected penalties were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 247 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258365</link>
      <description>Signages assembled at a factory, dismantled for transport, and re-erected at petrol bunk sites were treated as movable excisable goods because they could be detached and shifted without losing identity, even though fixed on concrete foundations by bolts. The Court held that the dispute was predominantly factual and that site erection did not make the signages immovable property. A Board circular on non-dutiability of immovable final products in CKD or unassembled form did not assist the assessee because the signages were found to be movable. Duty demand and connected penalties were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>