<?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>2002 (3) TMI 140 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51316</link>
    <description>Methane gas arising during manufacture of denatured ethyl alcohol was held not excisable because marketability is an essential ingredient of excisable goods. The text states that mere inclusion in the tariff does not make a commodity dutiable unless it is known to the market as goods, and the revenue produced no evidence to displace the finding that the gas was not marketable. On that basis, the demand failed and the revenue appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:33:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89794" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 140 - CEGAT, COURT NO. III, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51316</link>
      <description>Methane gas arising during manufacture of denatured ethyl alcohol was held not excisable because marketability is an essential ingredient of excisable goods. The text states that mere inclusion in the tariff does not make a commodity dutiable unless it is known to the market as goods, and the revenue produced no evidence to displace the finding that the gas was not marketable. On that basis, the demand failed and the revenue appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>