<?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 (7) TMI 242 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54543</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, by ruling that MS flanges were integral parts of Wind Operated Electric Generators (WOEG) and thus eligible for exemption under Notification 6/2000-C.E. The decision underscored the necessity of precise classification declarations and correct interpretation of exemption criteria. The Tribunal found that the flanges, used in the erection of Wind Mill Towers, were essential for the functioning of WOEG, and the consumption at the site met the exemption requirements. Allegations of suppression of facts by the company were addressed, emphasizing the department&#039;s duty to scrutinize classification declarations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 17:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 242 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54543</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, by ruling that MS flanges were integral parts of Wind Operated Electric Generators (WOEG) and thus eligible for exemption under Notification 6/2000-C.E. The decision underscored the necessity of precise classification declarations and correct interpretation of exemption criteria. The Tribunal found that the flanges, used in the erection of Wind Mill Towers, were essential for the functioning of WOEG, and the consumption at the site met the exemption requirements. Allegations of suppression of facts by the company were addressed, emphasizing the department&#039;s duty to scrutinize classification declarations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54543</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>