<?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>1994 (4) TMI 163 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83240</link>
    <description>Disclosure of the production and sale value of cotton waste in balance-sheets and private accounts prevented the removal from being characterised as clandestine. Because the record reflected the relevant value and there were no specific allegations or proof of suppression of facts, the Department could not invoke the extended period of limitation. The larger limitation period was therefore invalidly applied, and the demand failed on limitation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 10:33:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120385" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (4) TMI 163 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83240</link>
      <description>Disclosure of the production and sale value of cotton waste in balance-sheets and private accounts prevented the removal from being characterised as clandestine. Because the record reflected the relevant value and there were no specific allegations or proof of suppression of facts, the Department could not invoke the extended period of limitation. The larger limitation period was therefore invalidly applied, and the demand failed on limitation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>