<?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 208 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35288</link>
    <description>Woven cotton fabrics subjected to calendering with plain rollers were treated as falling under the specific exemption entry for woven cotton fabrics subjected to listed processes, not the general entry for cotton fabrics simpliciter. The notification was read to include calendering within the processed-fabrics entry, and the exclusion of calendering with grooved rollers supported the view that plain-roller calendering remained covered. Whether calendering amounted to manufacture was treated as irrelevant because the dispute concerned classification after the process had been undertaken. On that reading, the prescribed condition for exemption was not met and the exemption was unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 208 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35288</link>
      <description>Woven cotton fabrics subjected to calendering with plain rollers were treated as falling under the specific exemption entry for woven cotton fabrics subjected to listed processes, not the general entry for cotton fabrics simpliciter. The notification was read to include calendering within the processed-fabrics entry, and the exclusion of calendering with grooved rollers supported the view that plain-roller calendering remained covered. Whether calendering amounted to manufacture was treated as irrelevant because the dispute concerned classification after the process had been undertaken. On that reading, the prescribed condition for exemption was not met and the exemption was unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>