<?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>1994 (12) TMI 93 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44497</link>
    <description>Marketability remains an essential ingredient of excisable goods: a captive intermediate product used in a continuous manufacturing process is not dutiable unless it is a distinct commodity known to, and capable of sale in, the market. Applying that principle, the Court treated the sliver emerging during manufacture of semi-worsted carpet yarn as a transient in-process material with no shelf life, market identity, or practical capacity to be bought or sold, and therefore not exigible to central excise duty. The Court also rejected the alternative-remedy objection and examined the merits, noting the long pendency of the writ and the academic character of the challenge to certain provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 15:48:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (12) TMI 93 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44497</link>
      <description>Marketability remains an essential ingredient of excisable goods: a captive intermediate product used in a continuous manufacturing process is not dutiable unless it is a distinct commodity known to, and capable of sale in, the market. Applying that principle, the Court treated the sliver emerging during manufacture of semi-worsted carpet yarn as a transient in-process material with no shelf life, market identity, or practical capacity to be bought or sold, and therefore not exigible to central excise duty. The Court also rejected the alternative-remedy objection and examined the merits, noting the long pendency of the writ and the academic character of the challenge to certain provisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44497</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>