<?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>2003 (2) TMI 86 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48939</link>
    <description>For exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. as amended, cotton yarn became specified goods from 25-4-1994, so clearances from that date had to be counted chronologically toward the aggregate first-clearance limit, whether duty was paid or not. The scheme did not permit exclusion of duty-paid clearances merely because the assessee had not yet opted to avail the exemption. In the absence of an opt-out, the exemption operated on all clearances after the notification became applicable to cotton yarn. The earlier view that computation could begin only from the date of actual availing of exemption was rejected, and the Revenue&#039;s interpretation was accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 13:14:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87419" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 86 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48939</link>
      <description>For exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. as amended, cotton yarn became specified goods from 25-4-1994, so clearances from that date had to be counted chronologically toward the aggregate first-clearance limit, whether duty was paid or not. The scheme did not permit exclusion of duty-paid clearances merely because the assessee had not yet opted to avail the exemption. In the absence of an opt-out, the exemption operated on all clearances after the notification became applicable to cotton yarn. The earlier view that computation could begin only from the date of actual availing of exemption was rejected, and the Revenue&#039;s interpretation was accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>