<?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 (12) TMI 72 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351803</link>
    <description>Eligibility for Small Scale Industry exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. turned on whether defence supplies had to be included in aggregate clearances for the exemption limit. The text states that the issue had already been decided against the appellant in an earlier appeal, where defence supplies were treated as includible and no basis was found to interfere with the demand. It also states that cum-duty benefit was refused because there was no evidence that the price was duty-inclusive. On that basis, the appellant was found not entitled to SSI exemption for the disputed period and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Dec 2017 10:07:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 72 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351803</link>
      <description>Eligibility for Small Scale Industry exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. turned on whether defence supplies had to be included in aggregate clearances for the exemption limit. The text states that the issue had already been decided against the appellant in an earlier appeal, where defence supplies were treated as includible and no basis was found to interfere with the demand. It also states that cum-duty benefit was refused because there was no evidence that the price was duty-inclusive. On that basis, the appellant was found not entitled to SSI exemption for the disputed period and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>