<?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>2007 (8) TMI 739 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177957</link>
    <description>Exemption for warehoused goods cleared to Navy and Coast Guard vessels was held not to be denied merely because the warehousing facility had been withdrawn. The Tribunal noted that duty demand had been raised for the period after withdrawal and exemption under Notification No. 64/95-CE was refused for stock held on the relevant dates, but it followed its earlier view that withdrawal of warehousing by itself does not justify denial where the goods are otherwise exempted. On that reasoning, the denial of exemption was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2017 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 739 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177957</link>
      <description>Exemption for warehoused goods cleared to Navy and Coast Guard vessels was held not to be denied merely because the warehousing facility had been withdrawn. The Tribunal noted that duty demand had been raised for the period after withdrawal and exemption under Notification No. 64/95-CE was refused for stock held on the relevant dates, but it followed its earlier view that withdrawal of warehousing by itself does not justify denial where the goods are otherwise exempted. On that reasoning, the denial of exemption was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>