https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51193 Exemption under Notification No. 208/83-C.E. depended on the inputs strictly answering the tariff description and the notification's specified goods requirement. The materials bought by the assessee were found to be trimmings, forgings, dismantled machines, broken engineering goods, punched steel containers and similar broken articles, and were not proved to be pieces roughly shaped. The insertion of that expression on invoices was not effectively rebutted. For the period governed by the amended Note 6 to Section XV, the materials were waste and scrap and therefore outside the notification; for the earlier period, the assessee still failed to show that the goods had any use other than recovery of metal. The burden of proving exemption was not discharged, so the benefit failed. en-us Tue, 14 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:21:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51193 Exemption under Notification No. 208/83-C.E. depended on the inputs strictly answering the tariff description and the notification's specified goods requirement. The materials bought by the assessee were found to be trimmings, forgings, dismantled machines, broken engineering goods, punched steel containers and similar broken articles, and were not proved to be pieces roughly shaped. The insertion of that expression on invoices was not effectively rebutted. For the period governed by the amended Note 6 to Section XV, the materials were waste and scrap and therefore outside the notification; for the earlier period, the assessee still failed to show that the goods had any use other than recovery of metal. The burden of proving exemption was not discharged, so the benefit failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51193