<?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>2019 (1) TMI 371 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373206</link>
    <description>An area-based exemption under Notification No. 39/2001-C.E. was treated as available where the unit had commenced commercial production before the cut-off date and satisfied the foundational conditions of the scheme. Later installation of additional machinery did not, by itself, defeat the exemption because the notification contained no express bar on post cut-off expansion, and the additions were used only at intermediate stages without increasing the capacity of the final exempted products. The separate limitation point was not independently examined after the merits were decided in favour of the assessee, and consequential refund or re-credit followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2019 18:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=551892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 371 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373206</link>
      <description>An area-based exemption under Notification No. 39/2001-C.E. was treated as available where the unit had commenced commercial production before the cut-off date and satisfied the foundational conditions of the scheme. Later installation of additional machinery did not, by itself, defeat the exemption because the notification contained no express bar on post cut-off expansion, and the additions were used only at intermediate stages without increasing the capacity of the final exempted products. The separate limitation point was not independently examined after the merits were decided in favour of the assessee, and consequential refund or re-credit followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>