<?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 (4) TMI 169 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54187</link>
    <description>Computer workstations, storage racks and specially designed chairs used in a software export unit were held to qualify for exemption under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. because the notification specifically extended benefit to office equipment, spares and consumables. The Tribunal found the goods to be specially designed and essential for software engineers and software development for export, so they were covered by the notified entry even if they were not conventional capital goods. Reliance on a separate decision involving tables, chairs and air-conditioners in another manufacturing context was distinguished, as the present notification itself contemplated office equipment integral to the unit&#039;s functioning. The demand was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:28:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 169 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54187</link>
      <description>Computer workstations, storage racks and specially designed chairs used in a software export unit were held to qualify for exemption under Notification No. 1/95-C.E. because the notification specifically extended benefit to office equipment, spares and consumables. The Tribunal found the goods to be specially designed and essential for software engineers and software development for export, so they were covered by the notified entry even if they were not conventional capital goods. Reliance on a separate decision involving tables, chairs and air-conditioners in another manufacturing context was distinguished, as the present notification itself contemplated office equipment integral to the unit&#039;s functioning. The demand was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>