<?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>1959 (5) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45586</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification S.R.O. 500 issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as having statutory force, and the construction of the notification controlled entitlement to duty relief for soap cleared during the relevant period. On that construction, soft and liquid soap was not treated as a separate class outside the expressions household, laundry or toilet soap merely because of its physical form, and the record did not support the Revenue&#039;s exclusionary case. The petitioner was therefore within the exempted category for the period in question, and the demand notices were stated to be illegal and invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:27:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (5) TMI 1 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45586</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification S.R.O. 500 issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as having statutory force, and the construction of the notification controlled entitlement to duty relief for soap cleared during the relevant period. On that construction, soft and liquid soap was not treated as a separate class outside the expressions household, laundry or toilet soap merely because of its physical form, and the record did not support the Revenue&#039;s exclusionary case. The petitioner was therefore within the exempted category for the period in question, and the demand notices were stated to be illegal and invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>