<?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 (8) TMI 888 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346830</link>
    <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that pipes procured for a rural agricultural water supply scheme qualified for exemption under Notification No. 3/2004-C.E. because the appellant had obtained the requisite certificate from the District Collector and the scheme materials showed use of the pipes as part of the water delivery and storage arrangement. The certificate issued after examination of the scheme was accepted as sufficient to extend the notification benefit. As the duty demand itself failed, the penalty under Rule 26 for dealing with goods alleged to be liable for confiscation was also unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:52:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486611" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 888 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346830</link>
      <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that pipes procured for a rural agricultural water supply scheme qualified for exemption under Notification No. 3/2004-C.E. because the appellant had obtained the requisite certificate from the District Collector and the scheme materials showed use of the pipes as part of the water delivery and storage arrangement. The certificate issued after examination of the scheme was accepted as sufficient to extend the notification benefit. As the duty demand itself failed, the penalty under Rule 26 for dealing with goods alleged to be liable for confiscation was also unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346830</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>