<?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>2020 (12) TMI 316 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401517</link>
    <description>Goods specifically retained in the Fourth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 continue to be treated as excisable goods for purposes of statutory exclusions under the legacy dispute resolution scheme, even if no current duty rate is notified. The text explains that the charging structure under section 3, read with the relevant definitions, preserves their excisable character, so Superior Kerosene Oil remained within the exclusion in section 125(1)(h) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. It also states that inclusion of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule was not inconsistent with section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 or the amended constitutional excise entry, and that the challenge to such inclusion failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2020 05:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 316 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401517</link>
      <description>Goods specifically retained in the Fourth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944 continue to be treated as excisable goods for purposes of statutory exclusions under the legacy dispute resolution scheme, even if no current duty rate is notified. The text explains that the charging structure under section 3, read with the relevant definitions, preserves their excisable character, so Superior Kerosene Oil remained within the exclusion in section 125(1)(h) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. It also states that inclusion of Superior Kerosene Oil in the Fourth Schedule was not inconsistent with section 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 or the amended constitutional excise entry, and that the challenge to such inclusion failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401517</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>