<?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 (8) TMI 59 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262142</link>
    <description>Commercial production, not trial production, was the test for exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, and it began when the plant was commissioned and capable of producing goods of the desired quality, even if not at full capacity. The evidence of intended commencement before the cut-off date, furnace commissioning by 30.03.2010, raw material procurement and consumption, power use on 30.03.2010 and 31.03.2010, and clearance of ingots in March 2010 supported commencement on or before 31.03.2010. The department&#039;s load-supply analysis alone was insufficient to displace the commissioning certificate and surrounding proof of actual production, so the unit qualified for the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392022" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 59 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262142</link>
      <description>Commercial production, not trial production, was the test for exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, and it began when the plant was commissioned and capable of producing goods of the desired quality, even if not at full capacity. The evidence of intended commencement before the cut-off date, furnace commissioning by 30.03.2010, raw material procurement and consumption, power use on 30.03.2010 and 31.03.2010, and clearance of ingots in March 2010 supported commencement on or before 31.03.2010. The department&#039;s load-supply analysis alone was insufficient to displace the commissioning certificate and surrounding proof of actual production, so the unit qualified for the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262142</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>