<?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>1988 (3) TMI 64 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42178</link>
    <description>Excise exemption notifications may be withdrawn, varied or restructured where the resulting duty remains within the statutory ceiling; changing the basis or method of exemption does not itself impermissibly enhance basic duty. For goods manufactured before a revised notification but removed later, manufacture remains the taxable event, while the applicable duty rate and tariff valuation are determined by the date of actual removal under the excise rules. Goods held in stock when an exemption is withdrawn are therefore chargeable at the removal-date rate if duty has not already been paid. The notification was legally sustainable and the challenges failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:24:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (3) TMI 64 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42178</link>
      <description>Excise exemption notifications may be withdrawn, varied or restructured where the resulting duty remains within the statutory ceiling; changing the basis or method of exemption does not itself impermissibly enhance basic duty. For goods manufactured before a revised notification but removed later, manufacture remains the taxable event, while the applicable duty rate and tariff valuation are determined by the date of actual removal under the excise rules. Goods held in stock when an exemption is withdrawn are therefore chargeable at the removal-date rate if duty has not already been paid. The notification was legally sustainable and the challenges failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>