<?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>1991 (5) TMI 154 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81336</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for duty demand under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 cannot be invoked unless the assessee consciously suppresses or deliberately withholds material facts. Here, the assessee had written to the department and filed a declaration stating that soap would be manufactured by the Tawda Process without power or steam and that exemption under Notification No. 28/64-C.E. was claimed. Those disclosures put the department on notice of the intended exempt activity, so the department&#039;s failure to act on the information did not amount to suppression by the assessee. The alleged suppression was therefore unsustainable and the extended limitation period was unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 18:29:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118481" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (5) TMI 154 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81336</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for duty demand under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 cannot be invoked unless the assessee consciously suppresses or deliberately withholds material facts. Here, the assessee had written to the department and filed a declaration stating that soap would be manufactured by the Tawda Process without power or steam and that exemption under Notification No. 28/64-C.E. was claimed. Those disclosures put the department on notice of the intended exempt activity, so the department&#039;s failure to act on the information did not amount to suppression by the assessee. The alleged suppression was therefore unsustainable and the extended limitation period was unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>