<?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>2007 (10) TMI 238 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30062</link>
    <description>An admitted shortage of finished marble slabs, not a question of manufacture, was the real controversy before the Tribunal. The assessee&#039;s explanation that the shortage resulted from wear and tear during storage or handling was not substantiated, so the factual basis for invoking the cited precedent was absent. Because that precedent concerned manufacture and not shortage of stock, it was inapplicable. On those facts, no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s order, so the reference petition was not maintainable, and the connected writ petition seeking refund on the same footing also failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68722" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 238 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30062</link>
      <description>An admitted shortage of finished marble slabs, not a question of manufacture, was the real controversy before the Tribunal. The assessee&#039;s explanation that the shortage resulted from wear and tear during storage or handling was not substantiated, so the factual basis for invoking the cited precedent was absent. Because that precedent concerned manufacture and not shortage of stock, it was inapplicable. On those facts, no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s order, so the reference petition was not maintainable, and the connected writ petition seeking refund on the same footing also failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>