<?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>2001 (8) TMI 251 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51010</link>
    <description>Fat liquor used in leather processing was treated as a lubricating preparation under Heading 34.03 because technical material and trade understanding showed it lubricated leather and reduced fibre cohesion. The exemption under Notification No. 13/92-C.E. was construed on its own language, and the HSN explanatory note could not override the notification&#039;s terms. On that basis, the product satisfied the description of a lubricating preparation, and the suggested distinction between a lubricating preparation and a preparation of a kind used in the leather industry did not defeat exemption. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 13:44:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 251 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51010</link>
      <description>Fat liquor used in leather processing was treated as a lubricating preparation under Heading 34.03 because technical material and trade understanding showed it lubricated leather and reduced fibre cohesion. The exemption under Notification No. 13/92-C.E. was construed on its own language, and the HSN explanatory note could not override the notification&#039;s terms. On that basis, the product satisfied the description of a lubricating preparation, and the suggested distinction between a lubricating preparation and a preparation of a kind used in the leather industry did not defeat exemption. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>