<?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>1986 (4) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41763</link>
    <description>Drilling, trimming and chamferring of duty-paid brake lining blanks were treated as manufacture because the unfinished blanks were not fit for direct vehicle use and the processes were essential to complete them for their intended marketable form. Applying the excise principle that manufacture includes processes incidental or ancillary to completion and results in a commercially distinct article with separate utility, the processed goods were held to become usable brake linings sold under the appellants&#039; trade name. The consequence was liability to obtain a licence and pay excise duty, including differential duty, on the processed linings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Jun 2010 18:39:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80292" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (4) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41763</link>
      <description>Drilling, trimming and chamferring of duty-paid brake lining blanks were treated as manufacture because the unfinished blanks were not fit for direct vehicle use and the processes were essential to complete them for their intended marketable form. Applying the excise principle that manufacture includes processes incidental or ancillary to completion and results in a commercially distinct article with separate utility, the processed goods were held to become usable brake linings sold under the appellants&#039; trade name. The consequence was liability to obtain a licence and pay excise duty, including differential duty, on the processed linings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>