<?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 (9) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92237</link>
    <description>Alleged shortage of polished granite slabs was examined against the assessee&#039;s claim that breakages and wastage generated during polishing had been stored elsewhere and were reflected in a separate RG 1 wastage register. The text states that this factual position required fresh verification, so the shortage finding could not stand without de novo inquiry. It also notes that valuation based on comparable goods was left open on remand, while additional duty under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act was treated as customs duty. Clearance to DTA without Development Commissioner&#039;s permission did not by itself remove duty liability, and exemption under Notification No. 2/95 depended on proof of compliance with its conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:12:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129298" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 176 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92237</link>
      <description>Alleged shortage of polished granite slabs was examined against the assessee&#039;s claim that breakages and wastage generated during polishing had been stored elsewhere and were reflected in a separate RG 1 wastage register. The text states that this factual position required fresh verification, so the shortage finding could not stand without de novo inquiry. It also notes that valuation based on comparable goods was left open on remand, while additional duty under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act was treated as customs duty. Clearance to DTA without Development Commissioner&#039;s permission did not by itself remove duty liability, and exemption under Notification No. 2/95 depended on proof of compliance with its conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>