<?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 556 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388307</link>
    <description>Cement captively used within the factory qualified for exemption under Notification No. 67/95-CE because the phrase &quot;in or in relation to the manufacture&quot; was construed broadly to include use having a sufficient nexus with production. The denial of exemption on the ground that the cement was not directly consumed in the manufacturing process was based on an unduly narrow reading of the notification. The demand and adverse order were therefore set aside, and the assessee was held entitled to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=593930" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 556 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388307</link>
      <description>Cement captively used within the factory qualified for exemption under Notification No. 67/95-CE because the phrase &quot;in or in relation to the manufacture&quot; was construed broadly to include use having a sufficient nexus with production. The denial of exemption on the ground that the cement was not directly consumed in the manufacturing process was based on an unduly narrow reading of the notification. The demand and adverse order were therefore set aside, and the assessee was held entitled to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>