<?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>1986 (2) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72194</link>
    <description>Short-levy recovery was held time-barred because the goods had been cleared on classification lists and RT-12 returns accepted by the department, with no allegation of suppression, clandestine removal, or misdeclaration. The assessee also qualified for Notification No. 119/75 as the fabrication was carried out on customer-supplied materials on job-work terms, and for Notification No. 120/75 because the wagon invoice price reflected the actual sale price and free supplies by the railways were not shown to distort valuation. No violation of natural justice was established, and the penalty failed for want of a surviving duty basis and mens rea.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2011 11:44:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (2) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72194</link>
      <description>Short-levy recovery was held time-barred because the goods had been cleared on classification lists and RT-12 returns accepted by the department, with no allegation of suppression, clandestine removal, or misdeclaration. The assessee also qualified for Notification No. 119/75 as the fabrication was carried out on customer-supplied materials on job-work terms, and for Notification No. 120/75 because the wagon invoice price reflected the actual sale price and free supplies by the railways were not shown to distort valuation. No violation of natural justice was established, and the penalty failed for want of a surviving duty basis and mens rea.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>