<?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 (12) TMI 483 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94812</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning duty demand on biscuits due to non-inclusion of container costs in the assessable value. The Tribunal held that there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, and re-issuing a show cause notice after the matter had been settled was impermissible. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing the lack of grounds for invoking the extended period and the absence of intent to evade duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:25:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 483 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94812</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning duty demand on biscuits due to non-inclusion of container costs in the assessable value. The Tribunal held that there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, and re-issuing a show cause notice after the matter had been settled was impermissible. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing the lack of grounds for invoking the extended period and the absence of intent to evade duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>