<?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 (12) TMI 178 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51773</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the iron and steel structures manufactured by the appellants were not integral components of the machinery as claimed and did not qualify as capital goods eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 67/95-C.E. The demand for excise duty was upheld, but the penalty was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh. Consequently, the appellants were deemed ineligible for the notification benefit, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 11:29:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 178 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51773</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the iron and steel structures manufactured by the appellants were not integral components of the machinery as claimed and did not qualify as capital goods eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 67/95-C.E. The demand for excise duty was upheld, but the penalty was reduced to Rs. 1 lakh. Consequently, the appellants were deemed ineligible for the notification benefit, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51773</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>