<?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 (5) TMI 291 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91994</link>
    <description>A central excise demand cannot be sustained on a ground not set out in the show cause notice; here, the notice alleged inflation of bought-out items and deflation of manufactured items, but the confirmation relied on a different basis, so the demand was unsustainable. The adjudicating authority also failed to examine the assessee&#039;s valuation objections on merits, including the alleged inflation, overlooked overheads, and the computation adopted. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, with a direction that proforma Modvat credit be allowed if any demand was again upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:05:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 291 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91994</link>
      <description>A central excise demand cannot be sustained on a ground not set out in the show cause notice; here, the notice alleged inflation of bought-out items and deflation of manufactured items, but the confirmation relied on a different basis, so the demand was unsustainable. The adjudicating authority also failed to examine the assessee&#039;s valuation objections on merits, including the alleged inflation, overlooked overheads, and the computation adopted. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, with a direction that proforma Modvat credit be allowed if any demand was again upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>