<?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 1175 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352906</link>
    <description>Site-based fabrication or erection carried out under the customer&#039;s specifications, drawings, supervision and control, with materials and design supplied by the customer and consideration limited to labour charges, is not treated as manufacture for central excise purposes, so no duty is attracted on that activity. Goods supported by photographs and a certificate from the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts) as falling within the handicrafts category are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 76/86-CE, and the claim cannot be rejected without rebuttal evidence. The Departmental challenge therefore failed and the demand was dropped.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 12:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501068" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1175 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352906</link>
      <description>Site-based fabrication or erection carried out under the customer&#039;s specifications, drawings, supervision and control, with materials and design supplied by the customer and consideration limited to labour charges, is not treated as manufacture for central excise purposes, so no duty is attracted on that activity. Goods supported by photographs and a certificate from the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts) as falling within the handicrafts category are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 76/86-CE, and the claim cannot be rejected without rebuttal evidence. The Departmental challenge therefore failed and the demand was dropped.</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=352906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>