<?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 (10) TMI 385 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333365</link>
    <description>An exemption claim under Notification No. 50/2003-CE depends on actual substantial expansion and increase in installed capacity. The Tribunal found that departmental doubts about machinery installation, transport records, certificates, power consumption and electricity load were unsupported by physical verification, technical inquiry, or reliable contrary evidence. Contemporaneous intimation, third-party records, Chartered Engineer and District Industries Centre certificates, procurement documents, and evidence of upgraded furnace capacity supported the assessee&#039;s claim. Presumptions drawn from production figures or electricity use could not displace that material. The exemption was therefore accepted, and the duty demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Aug 2017 15:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 385 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333365</link>
      <description>An exemption claim under Notification No. 50/2003-CE depends on actual substantial expansion and increase in installed capacity. The Tribunal found that departmental doubts about machinery installation, transport records, certificates, power consumption and electricity load were unsupported by physical verification, technical inquiry, or reliable contrary evidence. Contemporaneous intimation, third-party records, Chartered Engineer and District Industries Centre certificates, procurement documents, and evidence of upgraded furnace capacity supported the assessee&#039;s claim. Presumptions drawn from production figures or electricity use could not displace that material. The exemption was therefore accepted, and the duty demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>