<?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>1985 (7) TMI 213 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72118</link>
    <description>Cushion compound captively consumed in making cushion backed tread rubber is discussed as a potentially dutiable intermediate product before an exemption notification dated 14-10-1972, with the note stating that such notifications operate prospectively unless expressly made retrospective. It also records that a written notice identifying the period and amount can support a demand under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, particularly where full disclosure of manufacture and captive use was not made. For the later period, the text notes that the department&#039;s knowledge of captive consumption can make the extended limitation unavailable under Rule 10, and that duty must be recalculated by applying the correct rates and assessable value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 11:55:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110397" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (7) TMI 213 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72118</link>
      <description>Cushion compound captively consumed in making cushion backed tread rubber is discussed as a potentially dutiable intermediate product before an exemption notification dated 14-10-1972, with the note stating that such notifications operate prospectively unless expressly made retrospective. It also records that a written notice identifying the period and amount can support a demand under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, particularly where full disclosure of manufacture and captive use was not made. For the later period, the text notes that the department&#039;s knowledge of captive consumption can make the extended limitation unavailable under Rule 10, and that duty must be recalculated by applying the correct rates and assessable value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72118</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>