<?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 245 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54554</link>
    <description>Exemption on capital goods used in an export oriented unit was treated as sustainable where no notification condition required exclusive use for the unit&#039;s own production and the alleged misuse was not supported by independent material, while job work for a domestic unit remained permissible. Duty on clearances to the domestic tariff area was treated as not fastenable on the export oriented unit where the relevant policy treated such supplies as duty-free and any liability, if at all, lay on the purchaser. The note also records that incomplete consideration of documentary objections and statement evidence required de novo adjudication of the remaining demands and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:14:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 245 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54554</link>
      <description>Exemption on capital goods used in an export oriented unit was treated as sustainable where no notification condition required exclusive use for the unit&#039;s own production and the alleged misuse was not supported by independent material, while job work for a domestic unit remained permissible. Duty on clearances to the domestic tariff area was treated as not fastenable on the export oriented unit where the relevant policy treated such supplies as duty-free and any liability, if at all, lay on the purchaser. The note also records that incomplete consideration of documentary objections and statement evidence required de novo adjudication of the remaining demands and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54554</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>