<?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 (8) TMI 1835 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281465</link>
    <description>An existing unit that had earlier availed exemption under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E. could still claim exemption under Notification No. 1/2010-C.E. after a second substantial expansion, because the controlling Board Circular expressly permitted such later benefit if the notification conditions were satisfied. Prior use of the earlier area-based exemption did not bar the subsequent exemption. On that basis, the refund claims under the later notification were treated as valid and the exemption entitlement was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:23:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=575827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1835 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281465</link>
      <description>An existing unit that had earlier availed exemption under Notification No. 56/2002-C.E. could still claim exemption under Notification No. 1/2010-C.E. after a second substantial expansion, because the controlling Board Circular expressly permitted such later benefit if the notification conditions were satisfied. Prior use of the earlier area-based exemption did not bar the subsequent exemption. On that basis, the refund claims under the later notification were treated as valid and the exemption entitlement was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281465</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>