<?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>1979 (7) TMI 104 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40842</link>
    <description>Vegetable tallow produced by hydrogenation of vegetable non-essential oil was treated as a finished excisable product because it acquired a distinct, marketable identity, and further use in soap manufacture did not prevent that character. The exemption under Notification No. 33/63-Central Excises was unavailable where the proviso withdrew relief for inputs used in making finished excisable goods that were themselves exempt from duty. As the tallow had in fact been supplied for soap manufacture under the earlier exemption notification, the proviso applied and the exemption on the input oil could not be retained. The excise challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 May 2010 12:20:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79373" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (7) TMI 104 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40842</link>
      <description>Vegetable tallow produced by hydrogenation of vegetable non-essential oil was treated as a finished excisable product because it acquired a distinct, marketable identity, and further use in soap manufacture did not prevent that character. The exemption under Notification No. 33/63-Central Excises was unavailable where the proviso withdrew relief for inputs used in making finished excisable goods that were themselves exempt from duty. As the tallow had in fact been supplied for soap manufacture under the earlier exemption notification, the proviso applied and the exemption on the input oil could not be retained. The excise challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40842</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>