<?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 (7) TMI 757 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345645</link>
    <description>A registered co-operative society manufacturing specified goods in a rural area remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 88/1988-CE because the notification did not require the society&#039;s registration to be confined to the same rural location as the unit. The registration certificate&#039;s reference to Patna Municipal Corporation limits did not negate eligibility where the competent authority had not cancelled or withdrawn the certificate, the unit was established in the village with permission, and the Bihar State Khadi and Village Industries Board had recognised the unit. The denial of exemption, duty demand, and penalty were therefore unsustainable and were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 757 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345645</link>
      <description>A registered co-operative society manufacturing specified goods in a rural area remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 88/1988-CE because the notification did not require the society&#039;s registration to be confined to the same rural location as the unit. The registration certificate&#039;s reference to Patna Municipal Corporation limits did not negate eligibility where the competent authority had not cancelled or withdrawn the certificate, the unit was established in the village with permission, and the Bihar State Khadi and Village Industries Board had recognised the unit. The denial of exemption, duty demand, and penalty were therefore unsustainable and were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>