<?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>1976 (2) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45833</link>
    <description>An exemption notification that refers to the duty leviable under the tariff item read with any notification &quot;for the time being in force&quot; is broad enough to include later operative notifications affecting the actual duty burden. On that construction, the earlier percentage-based concession could be applied after giving effect to the later concessional rate for corrugated boards, rather than only on the unmodified tariff rate. The authorities&#039; narrower interpretation was rejected because it treated the earlier concession as if later notifications were irrelevant to the computation. The exemption scheme therefore permitted both notifications to operate together in determining the relief available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:26:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84360" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (2) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45833</link>
      <description>An exemption notification that refers to the duty leviable under the tariff item read with any notification &quot;for the time being in force&quot; is broad enough to include later operative notifications affecting the actual duty burden. On that construction, the earlier percentage-based concession could be applied after giving effect to the later concessional rate for corrugated boards, rather than only on the unmodified tariff rate. The authorities&#039; narrower interpretation was rejected because it treated the earlier concession as if later notifications were irrelevant to the computation. The exemption scheme therefore permitted both notifications to operate together in determining the relief available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>