<?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>1998 (5) TMI 86 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88847</link>
    <description>In excise adjudication, mere delay in deciding show cause notices does not invalidate the order where no statutory time limit exists, unless the assessee proves actual prejudice such as loss of evidence or witnesses. On limitation, suppression may arise where the assessee knew the nature and quality of comparable purchased goods, but the departmental knowledge of such purchases and the valuation method still required careful reconsideration. Valuation of captively consumed goods also had to account for differences in comparable goods, type, and unit size under the valuation rules. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication with a personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:15:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (5) TMI 86 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88847</link>
      <description>In excise adjudication, mere delay in deciding show cause notices does not invalidate the order where no statutory time limit exists, unless the assessee proves actual prejudice such as loss of evidence or witnesses. On limitation, suppression may arise where the assessee knew the nature and quality of comparable purchased goods, but the departmental knowledge of such purchases and the valuation method still required careful reconsideration. Valuation of captively consumed goods also had to account for differences in comparable goods, type, and unit size under the valuation rules. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication with a personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>