<?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>1985 (1) TMI 65 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41817</link>
    <description>Printed cartons were held not to qualify as products of the printing industry under the exemption notification because their dominant character was packaging, and exemption notifications must be construed strictly. Apprentices were not counted as workers for the workers-limit exemption, as the excise law did not include them and the Apprentices Act excludes them from the definition of workers unless specifically provided otherwise. For the capital investment exemption, the full value of the plant and machinery installed in the unit had to be taken, not merely the machinery used for one product line. Penalty for not taking out a licence was quashed in view of the petitioner&#039;s bona fide belief. Where cartons were made from supplied cardboard as job work, duty applied only to the job-work charges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:28:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (1) TMI 65 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41817</link>
      <description>Printed cartons were held not to qualify as products of the printing industry under the exemption notification because their dominant character was packaging, and exemption notifications must be construed strictly. Apprentices were not counted as workers for the workers-limit exemption, as the excise law did not include them and the Apprentices Act excludes them from the definition of workers unless specifically provided otherwise. For the capital investment exemption, the full value of the plant and machinery installed in the unit had to be taken, not merely the machinery used for one product line. Penalty for not taking out a licence was quashed in view of the petitioner&#039;s bona fide belief. Where cartons were made from supplied cardboard as job work, duty applied only to the job-work charges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41817</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>