<?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 341 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262424</link>
    <description>Area-based exemption under Notification No. 39/2001-CE was denied because the relevant Billets-producing Concast machine was installed after the prescribed cut-off date of 31.12.2005. The notification applied only to new industrial units fully set up within the stipulated period, and the record showed that earlier machinery before that date related to Ingots, not Billets. Billets and Ingots were treated as distinct commercial commodities, and the assessee&#039;s own pleadings and the Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate confirmed separate manufacture through the later-installed machine. Prior refund relief for other periods did not bar the Revenue from contesting eligibility for the period in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 341 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262424</link>
      <description>Area-based exemption under Notification No. 39/2001-CE was denied because the relevant Billets-producing Concast machine was installed after the prescribed cut-off date of 31.12.2005. The notification applied only to new industrial units fully set up within the stipulated period, and the record showed that earlier machinery before that date related to Ingots, not Billets. Billets and Ingots were treated as distinct commercial commodities, and the assessee&#039;s own pleadings and the Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate confirmed separate manufacture through the later-installed machine. Prior refund relief for other periods did not bar the Revenue from contesting eligibility for the period in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>