<?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 (7) TMI 186 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53131</link>
    <description>An exemption notification for machinery used in the production of a commodity was interpreted broadly, with &quot;production&quot; treated as wider than &quot;manufacture&quot;. Electroplating and electro-machining machinery under Heading 85.43 was found to be essential in intermediate processes that bring about a changed or marketable commodity meeting required specifications. On that basis, the Tribunal accepted that such machinery fell within the notification&#039;s scope and that a narrow reading would defeat the entry&#039;s effect for machinery of this class. The exemption was therefore held applicable, and the denial of exemption was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:24:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 186 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53131</link>
      <description>An exemption notification for machinery used in the production of a commodity was interpreted broadly, with &quot;production&quot; treated as wider than &quot;manufacture&quot;. Electroplating and electro-machining machinery under Heading 85.43 was found to be essential in intermediate processes that bring about a changed or marketable commodity meeting required specifications. On that basis, the Tribunal accepted that such machinery fell within the notification&#039;s scope and that a narrow reading would defeat the entry&#039;s effect for machinery of this class. The exemption was therefore held applicable, and the denial of exemption was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>