<?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>2017 (2) TMI 619 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338919</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals based on the precedent set by a previous judgment, favoring the respondents. Issues regarding delay in filing individual appeals, determination of separate units as the same factory, applicability of extended demand period, exemption eligibility under various notifications, processes not amounting to &quot;manufacture,&quot; and interpretation of a notification proviso were resolved in favor of the respondents. The Tribunal upheld that the processes undertaken were exempt under relevant notifications, and the units were considered separate factories, entitling the respondents to the benefit of the notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458634" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 619 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338919</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals based on the precedent set by a previous judgment, favoring the respondents. Issues regarding delay in filing individual appeals, determination of separate units as the same factory, applicability of extended demand period, exemption eligibility under various notifications, processes not amounting to &quot;manufacture,&quot; and interpretation of a notification proviso were resolved in favor of the respondents. The Tribunal upheld that the processes undertaken were exempt under relevant notifications, and the units were considered separate factories, entitling the respondents to the benefit of the notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>