<?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 (1) TMI 1689 - CESTAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303895</link>
    <description>Area based exemption was treated as continuing in principle where an eligible unit undergoes change of ownership or factory premises, because the notification and Board circulars permitted addition or modification of plant and machinery and production of new products during the exemption period. Those changes were not decisive by themselves. However, the key factual issue was whether the purchased gold unit had in fact been availing the exemption, and that required verification by the adjudicating authority. The matter was therefore remanded for limited factual determination, with directions to redecide entitlement after giving reasonable opportunity and considering further evidence if necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2022 21:45:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1689 - CESTAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303895</link>
      <description>Area based exemption was treated as continuing in principle where an eligible unit undergoes change of ownership or factory premises, because the notification and Board circulars permitted addition or modification of plant and machinery and production of new products during the exemption period. Those changes were not decisive by themselves. However, the key factual issue was whether the purchased gold unit had in fact been availing the exemption, and that required verification by the adjudicating authority. The matter was therefore remanded for limited factual determination, with directions to redecide entitlement after giving reasonable opportunity and considering further evidence if necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>