<?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>1997 (4) TMI 77 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44537</link>
    <description>Central excise duty is attracted on manufacture, and the convenience of collecting duty at the factory gate on removal does not change the point of levy. Goods fully manufactured before the introduction of the special excise duty were therefore not spared merely because they remained in the factory when the new levy came into force. Applying the earlier decision on the same issue, liability to special excise duty arose on manufacture, not on removal from the factory, and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 18:15:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83066" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 77 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44537</link>
      <description>Central excise duty is attracted on manufacture, and the convenience of collecting duty at the factory gate on removal does not change the point of levy. Goods fully manufactured before the introduction of the special excise duty were therefore not spared merely because they remained in the factory when the new levy came into force. Applying the earlier decision on the same issue, liability to special excise duty arose on manufacture, not on removal from the factory, and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44537</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>