<?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>1978 (11) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (NAGPUR BRANCH)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40764</link>
    <description>In a composite hydrogenation plant, vegetable oil moved within the same integrated manufacturing process from the crushing section to vanaspati production was not treated as removal from the factory premises under the Central Excise Rules, so it did not attract independent excise duty merely because it was an intermediate, potentially dutiable product. The duty collected on that oil was therefore refundable. A separate claim for interest on the refundable amount was declined because the dispute involved a debatable construction of the rules and there was no basis for discretionary interest on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 May 2010 14:39:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (11) TMI 74 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (NAGPUR BRANCH)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40764</link>
      <description>In a composite hydrogenation plant, vegetable oil moved within the same integrated manufacturing process from the crushing section to vanaspati production was not treated as removal from the factory premises under the Central Excise Rules, so it did not attract independent excise duty merely because it was an intermediate, potentially dutiable product. The duty collected on that oil was therefore refundable. A separate claim for interest on the refundable amount was declined because the dispute involved a debatable construction of the rules and there was no basis for discretionary interest on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40764</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>