<?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>1995 (4) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43981</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the Tribunal&#039;s decision. It held that the appellant&#039;s disinfectant fluids, with the ability to kill bacteria, were covered under Item 18 of the 1978 notification. The Court emphasized that the products&#039; capability to kill germs and bacteria aligned with the broad interpretation of the exemption categories, entitling the appellant to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2017 15:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (4) TMI 59 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43981</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the Tribunal&#039;s decision. It held that the appellant&#039;s disinfectant fluids, with the ability to kill bacteria, were covered under Item 18 of the 1978 notification. The Court emphasized that the products&#039; capability to kill germs and bacteria aligned with the broad interpretation of the exemption categories, entitling the appellant to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>