<?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>1995 (8) TMI 129 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84518</link>
    <description>An excise demand cannot be sustained under the extended limitation period without specific allegations and particulars of suppression, especially where the department already had prior knowledge of the goods and their classification. Low density polythene bags made from duty-paid polyethylene granules were treated as articles of plastic rather than a residuary item, and the Tribunal noted that the pre-1982 tariff and exemption materials supported classification under the specific plastic entry. On the recorded facts, duty under the residuary entry was not justified, and the classification and exemption claim were accepted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:38:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (8) TMI 129 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84518</link>
      <description>An excise demand cannot be sustained under the extended limitation period without specific allegations and particulars of suppression, especially where the department already had prior knowledge of the goods and their classification. Low density polythene bags made from duty-paid polyethylene granules were treated as articles of plastic rather than a residuary item, and the Tribunal noted that the pre-1982 tariff and exemption materials supported classification under the specific plastic entry. On the recorded facts, duty under the residuary entry was not justified, and the classification and exemption claim were accepted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>