<?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>2025 (6) TMI 1506 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773393</link>
    <description>Imported and locally procured automobile parts that were inspected, quality-checked, repacked, labelled with part details, and consolidated into master cartons were treated as deemed manufacture under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The contemporaneous verification report and records supported that the processes brought the goods within the statutory definition of manufacture, and the Revenue did not produce independent evidence to show the activities were merely incidental. Accordingly, the resulting challenge to reversal of Cenvat credit could not be sustained, because the treatment of the goods as marketable packed units attracted Section 2(f)(iii).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2025 10:25:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830921" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1506 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773393</link>
      <description>Imported and locally procured automobile parts that were inspected, quality-checked, repacked, labelled with part details, and consolidated into master cartons were treated as deemed manufacture under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The contemporaneous verification report and records supported that the processes brought the goods within the statutory definition of manufacture, and the Revenue did not produce independent evidence to show the activities were merely incidental. Accordingly, the resulting challenge to reversal of Cenvat credit could not be sustained, because the treatment of the goods as marketable packed units attracted Section 2(f)(iii).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773393</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>