<?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>1998 (4) TMI 140 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44950</link>
    <description>The court allowed two writ petitions while dismissing one, ruling that the petitioners&#039; structural fabrication work did not amount to manufacturing marketable goods subject to excise duty. The court did not find it necessary to declare Heading 73.08 of the Tariff Act ultra vires in light of the decision in the other writ petitions. No costs were awarded in the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 12:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 140 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44950</link>
      <description>The court allowed two writ petitions while dismissing one, ruling that the petitioners&#039; structural fabrication work did not amount to manufacturing marketable goods subject to excise duty. The court did not find it necessary to declare Heading 73.08 of the Tariff Act ultra vires in light of the decision in the other writ petitions. No costs were awarded in the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>