<?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>2016 (6) TMI 767 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329058</link>
    <description>For area-based exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, the relevant test is whether the industrial unit as a whole achieved substantial expansion by at least 25% in installed capacity; separate expansion of each product line is not required. On that basis, the exemption was held available for all goods cleared from the unit, including intermediate products integrated with final manufacture. The demand was also found unsustainable because it was worked out on undisclosed investigative reports and without a clear basis for quantification, breaching natural justice. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee was held entitled to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 767 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329058</link>
      <description>For area-based exemption under Notification No. 50/2003-CE, the relevant test is whether the industrial unit as a whole achieved substantial expansion by at least 25% in installed capacity; separate expansion of each product line is not required. On that basis, the exemption was held available for all goods cleared from the unit, including intermediate products integrated with final manufacture. The demand was also found unsustainable because it was worked out on undisclosed investigative reports and without a clear basis for quantification, breaching natural justice. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee was held entitled to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>