<?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>1983 (7) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43477</link>
    <description>An exemption notification granting relief for manufacturers using duty-paid unmanufactured tobacco had to be applied by first computing excise duty on the actual assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and then deducting the notified relief. The notification could not be construed to reduce the excise component first and recalculate duty on an artificially enhanced assessable value, because that would defeat the purpose of the concession and create a heavier burden than the duty otherwise leviable. The impugned demand was therefore unsustainable, and the petitioners were entitled to the exemption in the manner claimed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:30:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82006" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 58 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43477</link>
      <description>An exemption notification granting relief for manufacturers using duty-paid unmanufactured tobacco had to be applied by first computing excise duty on the actual assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and then deducting the notified relief. The notification could not be construed to reduce the excise component first and recalculate duty on an artificially enhanced assessable value, because that would defeat the purpose of the concession and create a heavier burden than the duty otherwise leviable. The impugned demand was therefore unsustainable, and the petitioners were entitled to the exemption in the manner claimed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>