<?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 (12) TMI 146 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54725</link>
    <description>Excisability of spent solvents depends on the specific manufacturing process and the marketability of the material generated at the unit concerned; it cannot be concluded solely from precedent involving different factual settings. The appellate finding of non-excisability was therefore set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh examination by the original authority on manufacture and marketability. Where the entire duty demand had already been paid before the show-cause notice, interest and penalties were held not to be sustainable in relation to the same demand, including proposals against the company and its Managing Director.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:59:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93202" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 146 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54725</link>
      <description>Excisability of spent solvents depends on the specific manufacturing process and the marketability of the material generated at the unit concerned; it cannot be concluded solely from precedent involving different factual settings. The appellate finding of non-excisability was therefore set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh examination by the original authority on manufacture and marketability. Where the entire duty demand had already been paid before the show-cause notice, interest and penalties were held not to be sustainable in relation to the same demand, including proposals against the company and its Managing Director.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54725</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>