<?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>2003 (3) TMI 170 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51869</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification of goods under sub-heading 7326.90, ruling that the activity of profile cutting constituted manufacturing. The goods were deemed marketable as they were sold to customers, and the limitation defense was rejected due to concealment of the manufacturing process. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the duty demand and penalties imposed on the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:04:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90347" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 170 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51869</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the classification of goods under sub-heading 7326.90, ruling that the activity of profile cutting constituted manufacturing. The goods were deemed marketable as they were sold to customers, and the limitation defense was rejected due to concealment of the manufacturing process. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the duty demand and penalties imposed on the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>