<?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 (10) TMI 1674 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266399</link>
    <description>SSI exemption was denied where the assessee manufactured coated and uncoated micron minerals under a brand name already claimed by another entity, VIMCRO, before the dispute period; on that factual basis, the exemption notification was unavailable and duty with interest was upheld on merits. The related issues of limitation, cum-duty valuation, and CENVAT credit were not finally determined and were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402412" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1674 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266399</link>
      <description>SSI exemption was denied where the assessee manufactured coated and uncoated micron minerals under a brand name already claimed by another entity, VIMCRO, before the dispute period; on that factual basis, the exemption notification was unavailable and duty with interest was upheld on merits. The related issues of limitation, cum-duty valuation, and CENVAT credit were not finally determined and were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266399</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>