<?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>2008 (11) TMI 156 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33693</link>
    <description>Imported WEBNIX used as a de-foaming surfactant in glove manufacture was treated as a consumable and not a raw material, so exemption under Notification No. 8/97-C.E. could not be denied on that basis. The article also notes that the Board circular then in force clarified that imported consumables did not disqualify the unit from the notification benefit; a later withdrawal could not govern the earlier period. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period and no sustainable basis existed for the extended period, the demand was held time-barred. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee succeeded on merits and limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72322" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 156 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33693</link>
      <description>Imported WEBNIX used as a de-foaming surfactant in glove manufacture was treated as a consumable and not a raw material, so exemption under Notification No. 8/97-C.E. could not be denied on that basis. The article also notes that the Board circular then in force clarified that imported consumables did not disqualify the unit from the notification benefit; a later withdrawal could not govern the earlier period. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period and no sustainable basis existed for the extended period, the demand was held time-barred. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee succeeded on merits and limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33693</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>