<?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>1999 (1) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90844</link>
    <description>Steel tubular shelters were held classifiable as pre-fabricated buildings under CET sub-heading 9406.00 because they were supplied as complete shelters capable of assembly on site, and the absence of separate flooring did not change that character. The value of essential bought-out items supplied with the manufactured components was included in the assessable value, since duty applied to the completed excisable article. Mis-description and non-disclosure of the true nature of clearance justified invocation of the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A, so the demand was not time-barred. A first-time Modvat credit claim was remanded for verification and fresh quantification of duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:44:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127906" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 151 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90844</link>
      <description>Steel tubular shelters were held classifiable as pre-fabricated buildings under CET sub-heading 9406.00 because they were supplied as complete shelters capable of assembly on site, and the absence of separate flooring did not change that character. The value of essential bought-out items supplied with the manufactured components was included in the assessable value, since duty applied to the completed excisable article. Mis-description and non-disclosure of the true nature of clearance justified invocation of the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A, so the demand was not time-barred. A first-time Modvat credit claim was remanded for verification and fresh quantification of duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>