<?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 (10) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87424</link>
    <description>Fitting and machining imported steel tubes was treated as manufacture because the process produced steel cops with a new name, character and use, classifiable under sub-heading 7308.90. The exemption under Notification No. 281/86 was held inapplicable because the cops were used in production and packing, not in repair or maintenance of machinery. Limitation failed on suppression, as manufacture of cops was not declared and the Department had no deemed knowledge. The valuation of Rs. 10 per cop was accepted on the basis of debit notes and the lack of contrary proof. Modvat credit could not be denied solely for non-filing of declaration where excisability was disputed, and the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 18:12:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (10) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87424</link>
      <description>Fitting and machining imported steel tubes was treated as manufacture because the process produced steel cops with a new name, character and use, classifiable under sub-heading 7308.90. The exemption under Notification No. 281/86 was held inapplicable because the cops were used in production and packing, not in repair or maintenance of machinery. Limitation failed on suppression, as manufacture of cops was not declared and the Department had no deemed knowledge. The valuation of Rs. 10 per cop was accepted on the basis of debit notes and the lack of contrary proof. Modvat credit could not be denied solely for non-filing of declaration where excisability was disputed, and the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>