<?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>2005 (1) TMI 230 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53906</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification No. 64/95-C.E. was available for stores supplied for consumption on board Indian Navy vessels even where the goods were routed through the Navy&#039;s contractors, because the notification did not bar indirect supply and the naval end-use certificates established that the goods were actually received for specified naval use. The Tribunal treated the purchase orders and consumption certificates as sufficient correlation of the supplies to Indian Naval vessels and relied on earlier precedent, including approval by the Apex Court, to hold that direct supply to the Navy was not mandatory. Denial of the exemption on that ground was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:53:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 230 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53906</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification No. 64/95-C.E. was available for stores supplied for consumption on board Indian Navy vessels even where the goods were routed through the Navy&#039;s contractors, because the notification did not bar indirect supply and the naval end-use certificates established that the goods were actually received for specified naval use. The Tribunal treated the purchase orders and consumption certificates as sufficient correlation of the supplies to Indian Naval vessels and relied on earlier precedent, including approval by the Apex Court, to hold that direct supply to the Navy was not mandatory. Denial of the exemption on that ground was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>