<?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 (11) TMI 203 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51722</link>
    <description>A duty-free procurement exemption for a 100% Export Oriented Unit was confined to goods required for its own manufacturing activity. Furnace oil could not be brought within the generic term &quot;consumables&quot; so as to cover supply to another manufacturer&#039;s captive power plant, because the notification separately dealt with captive power plants, fuels for captive power plants, and furnace oil for boilers. That structure showed that the fuel benefit attached to the unit owning and operating the relevant plant or boiler, not to a purchaser of electricity or fuel for another unit. The claim for duty-free procurement therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 18:02:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 203 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51722</link>
      <description>A duty-free procurement exemption for a 100% Export Oriented Unit was confined to goods required for its own manufacturing activity. Furnace oil could not be brought within the generic term &quot;consumables&quot; so as to cover supply to another manufacturer&#039;s captive power plant, because the notification separately dealt with captive power plants, fuels for captive power plants, and furnace oil for boilers. That structure showed that the fuel benefit attached to the unit owning and operating the relevant plant or boiler, not to a purchaser of electricity or fuel for another unit. The claim for duty-free procurement therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>