<?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>2009 (2) TMI 187 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34854</link>
    <description>Clearances made by a job worker under parallel invoices, having already been treated as exempt under Notification No. 214/86-C.E., could not be added to the aggregate value for determining eligibility for SSI exemption under Notification No. 9/2002-C.E. Once those clearances were excluded, the basis for demanding duty at the full rate from the later invoices disappeared, and the consequential penalty also failed. The decision confirms that exempt job-work clearances are not includible in the SSI threshold computation under a separate notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73467" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 187 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34854</link>
      <description>Clearances made by a job worker under parallel invoices, having already been treated as exempt under Notification No. 214/86-C.E., could not be added to the aggregate value for determining eligibility for SSI exemption under Notification No. 9/2002-C.E. Once those clearances were excluded, the basis for demanding duty at the full rate from the later invoices disappeared, and the consequential penalty also failed. The decision confirms that exempt job-work clearances are not includible in the SSI threshold computation under a separate notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>