<?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 (10) TMI 68 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49955</link>
    <description>Oil blowing of petroleum bitumen was held not to amount to manufacture because the process merely increased the softening point and did not create a new and distinct commodity. Mere chemical change during processing was insufficient to establish emergence of a different product, and the later coordinate Bench view and Board circular supported that approach. As the blown bitumen was not a manufactured product on these facts, duty was not leviable on it on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:03:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 68 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49955</link>
      <description>Oil blowing of petroleum bitumen was held not to amount to manufacture because the process merely increased the softening point and did not create a new and distinct commodity. Mere chemical change during processing was insufficient to establish emergence of a different product, and the later coordinate Bench view and Board circular supported that approach. As the blown bitumen was not a manufactured product on these facts, duty was not leviable on it on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49955</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>