<?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 (10) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47417</link>
    <description>Conditional excise exemptions tied to Chapter X procedure must be strictly complied with where the notification makes registration, declaration, accounting and supervision part of eligibility. The analysis states that input relief under Notification No. 121/94-C.E. cannot be claimed on substantial compliance alone or on extrinsic proof of intended use, because the procedural requirements are integral to the exemption scheme, particularly in captive consumption settings where accountability of inputs is central. The earlier approach treating such conditions as relaxable was considered for reconsideration, and the legal issue was left open for authoritative review.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2014 14:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 89 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47417</link>
      <description>Conditional excise exemptions tied to Chapter X procedure must be strictly complied with where the notification makes registration, declaration, accounting and supervision part of eligibility. The analysis states that input relief under Notification No. 121/94-C.E. cannot be claimed on substantial compliance alone or on extrinsic proof of intended use, because the procedural requirements are integral to the exemption scheme, particularly in captive consumption settings where accountability of inputs is central. The earlier approach treating such conditions as relaxable was considered for reconsideration, and the legal issue was left open for authoritative review.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>