<?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>2018 (2) TMI 365 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354944</link>
    <description>Intermediate products from the reactor/kettle used in laminate and board manufacture were classified as prepared glues or adhesives under heading 3506, not as primary resins under Chapter 39. The Tribunal relied on earlier decisions on identical facts, the manufacturing process showing direct use as glue after addition of hardener and other inputs, and the HSN exclusion note supporting exclusion from Chapter 39. Revenue&#039;s test reports were rejected because of noted deficiencies and their failure to properly analyse the process. As the goods were not Chapter 39 resins, denial of the area-based exemption was unsustainable and the demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 08:23:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507903" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 365 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354944</link>
      <description>Intermediate products from the reactor/kettle used in laminate and board manufacture were classified as prepared glues or adhesives under heading 3506, not as primary resins under Chapter 39. The Tribunal relied on earlier decisions on identical facts, the manufacturing process showing direct use as glue after addition of hardener and other inputs, and the HSN exclusion note supporting exclusion from Chapter 39. Revenue&#039;s test reports were rejected because of noted deficiencies and their failure to properly analyse the process. As the goods were not Chapter 39 resins, denial of the area-based exemption was unsustainable and the demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354944</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>