<?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 (11) TMI 429 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388180</link>
    <description>Exemption for polyester staple fibre claimed to have been manufactured predominantly from plastic scrap or plastic waste, including PET bottles, required fresh factual examination because the effect of yarn waste converted into popcorn had not been conclusively established. The Tribunal noted that expert reports supported the claim that such popcorn could be treated as recycled plastic material, but its percentage contribution and role in the final process remained unclear. As the record was incomplete on these material aspects, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration. The Tribunal expressly made no finding on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 10 Nov 2019 15:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=593646" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 429 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388180</link>
      <description>Exemption for polyester staple fibre claimed to have been manufactured predominantly from plastic scrap or plastic waste, including PET bottles, required fresh factual examination because the effect of yarn waste converted into popcorn had not been conclusively established. The Tribunal noted that expert reports supported the claim that such popcorn could be treated as recycled plastic material, but its percentage contribution and role in the final process remained unclear. As the record was incomplete on these material aspects, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration. The Tribunal expressly made no finding on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>