<?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 (7) TMI 173 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50236</link>
    <description>A small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was treated as product-wise, not as a blanket bar across all clearances by the assessee. The restriction in paragraph 4 applied only where the assessee chose, within the same financial year, to avail or forego exemption for the same product at different times. Duty paid on waste and scrap of copper could not deny exemption for a distinct product category, namely machinery and machinery parts, because no such option had been exercised for those goods. The Revenue&#039;s demand on machinery parts therefore failed, and the duty and penalty order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 15:23:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 173 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50236</link>
      <description>A small scale exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was treated as product-wise, not as a blanket bar across all clearances by the assessee. The restriction in paragraph 4 applied only where the assessee chose, within the same financial year, to avail or forego exemption for the same product at different times. Duty paid on waste and scrap of copper could not deny exemption for a distinct product category, namely machinery and machinery parts, because no such option had been exercised for those goods. The Revenue&#039;s demand on machinery parts therefore failed, and the duty and penalty order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>