<?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>2000 (6) TMI 799 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190427</link>
    <description>Cotton fabrics processed without the aid of power remained within the exemption, and calendering with plain rollers did not displace that benefit where the other processing was done without power. Duty under the amended notification also failed because the record did not establish that keiring operations were continuing after the asserted cessation. The demand relating to Navneet Manufacturing Company could not be sustained since that unit was not specifically covered by the notice, and penalty fell once the substantive duty demands failed. The exemption remained available and the consequential demands and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:05:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (6) TMI 799 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190427</link>
      <description>Cotton fabrics processed without the aid of power remained within the exemption, and calendering with plain rollers did not displace that benefit where the other processing was done without power. Duty under the amended notification also failed because the record did not establish that keiring operations were continuing after the asserted cessation. The demand relating to Navneet Manufacturing Company could not be sustained since that unit was not specifically covered by the notice, and penalty fell once the substantive duty demands failed. The exemption remained available and the consequential demands and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>