<?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 (5) TMI 1350 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360786</link>
    <description>Notification No. 56/2002-CE, as amended, required a certificate from the General Manager of the concerned District Industries Centre evidencing creation of additional regular employment. On the record, the certificate stated that the unit had increased regular employment by more than 25%, which met the prescribed threshold. The exemption claim was therefore accepted, and the benefit under the notification was upheld on the basis that the employment condition had been satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521313" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 1350 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360786</link>
      <description>Notification No. 56/2002-CE, as amended, required a certificate from the General Manager of the concerned District Industries Centre evidencing creation of additional regular employment. On the record, the certificate stated that the unit had increased regular employment by more than 25%, which met the prescribed threshold. The exemption claim was therefore accepted, and the benefit under the notification was upheld on the basis that the employment condition had been satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>