<?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 (10) TMI 226 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51038</link>
    <description>A valid and uncancelled small-scale industry registration entitled the unit to exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E., and a later departmental objection based on another notification could not by itself withdraw that benefit. The decisive point was that the SSI registration remained effective because it had not been cancelled or withdrawn by the competent authority. If the Revenue questioned the registration, the proper course was to seek cancellation or other lawful action before that authority. On that basis, the excise exemption was held to remain available and the denial of the benefit was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:13:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89517" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 226 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51038</link>
      <description>A valid and uncancelled small-scale industry registration entitled the unit to exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E., and a later departmental objection based on another notification could not by itself withdraw that benefit. The decisive point was that the SSI registration remained effective because it had not been cancelled or withdrawn by the competent authority. If the Revenue questioned the registration, the proper course was to seek cancellation or other lawful action before that authority. On that basis, the excise exemption was held to remain available and the denial of the benefit was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>