<?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 (1) TMI 612 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98127</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi upheld the duty demand of Rs. 2,81,169.70 and penalty of Rs. 1.75 lakhs imposed on M/s. Bharat Silicate Industries for clearing Sodium Silicate without payment of duty by suppressing production and misrepresentation. The Tribunal found that Bharat Silicate Industries and Bharat Chemical Works were operating as one entity, exceeding the prescribed limit under the Small Scale Industries notification. The duty demand and penalty were upheld as the appellants did not contest the combination of clearances exceeding the limit. The appeals were rejected, affirming the validity of the duty demand and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:53:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135184" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 612 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98127</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi upheld the duty demand of Rs. 2,81,169.70 and penalty of Rs. 1.75 lakhs imposed on M/s. Bharat Silicate Industries for clearing Sodium Silicate without payment of duty by suppressing production and misrepresentation. The Tribunal found that Bharat Silicate Industries and Bharat Chemical Works were operating as one entity, exceeding the prescribed limit under the Small Scale Industries notification. The duty demand and penalty were upheld as the appellants did not contest the combination of clearances exceeding the limit. The appeals were rejected, affirming the validity of the duty demand and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>