<?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>1988 (2) TMI 252 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73647</link>
    <description>Goods actually exported are excluded from the turnover calculation for exemption under Notification No. 105/80-C.E., even where export takes place through another entity, provided documentary proof establishes the export; the clearances were therefore remanded for verification and recomputation. For valuation, goods manufactured for HOC were assessable at the market sale price of comparable independent sales, since the supplies were not sales and HOC was not a separate class of buyers for Section 4 purposes; valuation on conversion charges and raw material cost was rejected. Incomplete disclosure of separate values for market sales and HOC supplies constituted suppression of material facts, justifying the extended limitation period under Section 11A(1).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:56:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111926" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (2) TMI 252 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73647</link>
      <description>Goods actually exported are excluded from the turnover calculation for exemption under Notification No. 105/80-C.E., even where export takes place through another entity, provided documentary proof establishes the export; the clearances were therefore remanded for verification and recomputation. For valuation, goods manufactured for HOC were assessable at the market sale price of comparable independent sales, since the supplies were not sales and HOC was not a separate class of buyers for Section 4 purposes; valuation on conversion charges and raw material cost was rejected. Incomplete disclosure of separate values for market sales and HOC supplies constituted suppression of material facts, justifying the extended limitation period under Section 11A(1).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>