<?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 (6) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42035</link>
    <description>The court held that bagasse is considered a manufactured product under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as it undergoes processes incidental to completion. Bagasse, despite being a by-product, is commercially used, establishing its status as a commercial product. The court rejected the argument that bagasse is not a manufactured product, citing a previous ruling. Additionally, the court ruled that bagasse does not qualify as an intermediate good or component part for exemption purposes, as it does not contribute to the final product&#039;s manufacturing process. Consequently, the court upheld the duty demand on bagasse, dismissing the petitioner&#039;s claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:59:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80564" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (6) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42035</link>
      <description>The court held that bagasse is considered a manufactured product under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, as it undergoes processes incidental to completion. Bagasse, despite being a by-product, is commercially used, establishing its status as a commercial product. The court rejected the argument that bagasse is not a manufactured product, citing a previous ruling. Additionally, the court ruled that bagasse does not qualify as an intermediate good or component part for exemption purposes, as it does not contribute to the final product&#039;s manufacturing process. Consequently, the court upheld the duty demand on bagasse, dismissing the petitioner&#039;s claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>