<?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>1997 (3) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86624</link>
    <description>Clearances of a job worker and another concern cannot be clubbed to deny exemption under Notification No. 71/78 unless the Revenue establishes a real nexus, such as dummy status, flow back, or that the two entities are effectively one and the same. On the facts stated, the assessee was treated as an independent manufacturer acting on job-work basis, so the exemption remained available. The text also notes that where the show cause notice alleges non-disclosure of relevant clearances and suppression of material facts, the extended period of limitation may be invoked, so the limitation objection did not succeed on the ground urged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:21:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86624</link>
      <description>Clearances of a job worker and another concern cannot be clubbed to deny exemption under Notification No. 71/78 unless the Revenue establishes a real nexus, such as dummy status, flow back, or that the two entities are effectively one and the same. On the facts stated, the assessee was treated as an independent manufacturer acting on job-work basis, so the exemption remained available. The text also notes that where the show cause notice alleges non-disclosure of relevant clearances and suppression of material facts, the extended period of limitation may be invoked, so the limitation objection did not succeed on the ground urged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>