<?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>2004 (5) TMI 163 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52974</link>
    <description>Conversion of double paper coated copper wire into coils for transformer repair did not amount to manufacture because the coils did not emerge as distinct, marketable excisable goods, so the duty demand failed; the limitation objection was unnecessary once the levy itself was unsustainable. Transformers supplied to IGCAR were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 10/97-C.E. because the goods were scientific equipment or apparatus cleared to a qualifying research institution under the Atomic Energy Department for research use, supported by the required certificate, so the exemption conditions were met and the duty demand could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91451" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 163 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52974</link>
      <description>Conversion of double paper coated copper wire into coils for transformer repair did not amount to manufacture because the coils did not emerge as distinct, marketable excisable goods, so the duty demand failed; the limitation objection was unnecessary once the levy itself was unsustainable. Transformers supplied to IGCAR were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 10/97-C.E. because the goods were scientific equipment or apparatus cleared to a qualifying research institution under the Atomic Energy Department for research use, supported by the required certificate, so the exemption conditions were met and the duty demand could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52974</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>