<?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 (3) TMI 233 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90932</link>
    <description>Duty set-off under Notification No. 225/86-C.E. was held available for inputs used in goods exported under bond and later adjusted against duty on home clearances, because the notification did not require one-to-one correlation between specific inputs and final clearances. Exported goods were not treated as exempted or nil-rated goods, so the input credit could be utilised against duty on domestic clearances. The demand was also held time-barred, as the department knew the manufacturing activity, clearances, credit availment and utilisation from statutory records and returns, and there was no evidence of suppression or intent to evade duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:22:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127994" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 233 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90932</link>
      <description>Duty set-off under Notification No. 225/86-C.E. was held available for inputs used in goods exported under bond and later adjusted against duty on home clearances, because the notification did not require one-to-one correlation between specific inputs and final clearances. Exported goods were not treated as exempted or nil-rated goods, so the input credit could be utilised against duty on domestic clearances. The demand was also held time-barred, as the department knew the manufacturing activity, clearances, credit availment and utilisation from statutory records and returns, and there was no evidence of suppression or intent to evade duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90932</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>