<?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 (5) TMI 190 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51714</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the conversion of gauzes into saturated gauzes due to continuous use did not amount to manufacture. They held that the saturated gauzes were not classifiable as scrap of precious metals under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a new product with distinctive characteristics to emerge for Central Excise duty to be applicable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:48:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90192" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 190 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51714</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the conversion of gauzes into saturated gauzes due to continuous use did not amount to manufacture. They held that the saturated gauzes were not classifiable as scrap of precious metals under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a new product with distinctive characteristics to emerge for Central Excise duty to be applicable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>