<?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>2000 (8) TMI 114 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49859</link>
    <description>Exemption eligibility under central excise notifications must be tested only against the conditions stated in the notification itself, and external restrictions from another statute cannot be imported unless expressly incorporated. On that approach, a factory treated as belonging to a State Government was covered by Notification No. 74/93-C.E. where the notification&#039;s own requirements were met. The SSI exemptions under Notifications No. 175/86 and No. 1/93 also remained available, subject only to duty on clearances above the prescribed turnover ceiling. In the absence of a sustainable basis for alleging evasion, penalty was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:54:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 114 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49859</link>
      <description>Exemption eligibility under central excise notifications must be tested only against the conditions stated in the notification itself, and external restrictions from another statute cannot be imported unless expressly incorporated. On that approach, a factory treated as belonging to a State Government was covered by Notification No. 74/93-C.E. where the notification&#039;s own requirements were met. The SSI exemptions under Notifications No. 175/86 and No. 1/93 also remained available, subject only to duty on clearances above the prescribed turnover ceiling. In the absence of a sustainable basis for alleging evasion, penalty was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>