<?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>2000 (12) TMI 409 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95348</link>
    <description>When Modvat credit on duty-paid inputs was reversed before internal transfer to the spare parts department, a fresh duty demand could not be founded merely on the higher later sale price, and that demand was set aside. A demand confirmed without recorded reasons could not stand and was also set aside. The large demand relating to alleged clandestine clearance was remanded for fresh consideration because the factual record needed further examination, while the demand on imported-input sub-assemblies was sustained for want of documentary proof of indigenous input use or Modvat entitlement. The limitation plea failed because suppression was inferred from non-disclosure in statutory returns.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Dec 2011 13:39:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132407" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 409 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95348</link>
      <description>When Modvat credit on duty-paid inputs was reversed before internal transfer to the spare parts department, a fresh duty demand could not be founded merely on the higher later sale price, and that demand was set aside. A demand confirmed without recorded reasons could not stand and was also set aside. The large demand relating to alleged clandestine clearance was remanded for fresh consideration because the factual record needed further examination, while the demand on imported-input sub-assemblies was sustained for want of documentary proof of indigenous input use or Modvat entitlement. The limitation plea failed because suppression was inferred from non-disclosure in statutory returns.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>