<?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>2026 (8) TMI 9 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796136</link>
    <description>Captive-consumption exemption under Notification No. 67/95-C.E. is discussed for factory-used trolleys, lifting tackles, trailers, cabinets, workbenches, racks and tables. The note states that shop-floor equipment classifiable under Chapter 94 may qualify as capital goods where used in or in relation to manufacture of final products and not excluded by the notification. It also highlights that an operative prior determination on the identical issue should be followed under judicial discipline. Separately, it notes that an eight-day delay in filing an appeal fell within the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; condonable period. The stated effect is that denial of the captive-consumption exemption could not sustain the central excise duty demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 08:34:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914813" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 9 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796136</link>
      <description>Captive-consumption exemption under Notification No. 67/95-C.E. is discussed for factory-used trolleys, lifting tackles, trailers, cabinets, workbenches, racks and tables. The note states that shop-floor equipment classifiable under Chapter 94 may qualify as capital goods where used in or in relation to manufacture of final products and not excluded by the notification. It also highlights that an operative prior determination on the identical issue should be followed under judicial discipline. Separately, it notes that an eight-day delay in filing an appeal fell within the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; condonable period. The stated effect is that denial of the captive-consumption exemption could not sustain the central excise duty demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>