<?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 (8) TMI 275 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53461</link>
    <description>A duty demand or denial of exemption cannot be sustained on grounds not set out in the show cause notice, and an appellate authority cannot uphold the case on a new basis without fresh notice and opportunity to . The exemption under Notification No. 121/94, as amended, was confined to clearances for use in the factory of the same manufacturer under Chapter X procedure; clearances to another manufacturer&#039;s factory did not satisfy that condition. CT-2 certificates alone did not establish entitlement to the substantive exemption. The demand failed only to the extent it rested on new grounds, but the exemption claim failed on the notification&#039;s wording.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:25:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 275 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53461</link>
      <description>A duty demand or denial of exemption cannot be sustained on grounds not set out in the show cause notice, and an appellate authority cannot uphold the case on a new basis without fresh notice and opportunity to . The exemption under Notification No. 121/94, as amended, was confined to clearances for use in the factory of the same manufacturer under Chapter X procedure; clearances to another manufacturer&#039;s factory did not satisfy that condition. CT-2 certificates alone did not establish entitlement to the substantive exemption. The demand failed only to the extent it rested on new grounds, but the exemption claim failed on the notification&#039;s wording.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>