<?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>2005 (4) TMI 60 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47276</link>
    <description>The special capacity-based excise scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 assessed hot re-rolling mills on installed capacity, not actual production. Where each rolling mill had its own re-heating furnace, the annual capacity was to be computed by aggregating the capacity of both mills, even if only one mill could be operated at a time. The circular applied only where two rolling mills shared one re-heating furnace, in which case the higher capacity could be adopted. The approved installation of a second furnace did not change the assessment basis, so the capacity determination by clubbing both mills was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 60 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47276</link>
      <description>The special capacity-based excise scheme under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 assessed hot re-rolling mills on installed capacity, not actual production. Where each rolling mill had its own re-heating furnace, the annual capacity was to be computed by aggregating the capacity of both mills, even if only one mill could be operated at a time. The circular applied only where two rolling mills shared one re-heating furnace, in which case the higher capacity could be adopted. The approved installation of a second furnace did not change the assessment basis, so the capacity determination by clubbing both mills was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47276</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>