<?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 (3) TMI 787 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98870</link>
    <description>Where the Department revises an approved classification, the resulting duty demand is prospective and cannot be imposed for the period before the show cause notice. The Tribunal applied this principle to hold that the earlier confirmation of demand for the six months preceding the notice was inconsistent with the governing rule, and the demand for that prior period was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 13:13:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135927" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 787 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98870</link>
      <description>Where the Department revises an approved classification, the resulting duty demand is prospective and cannot be imposed for the period before the show cause notice. The Tribunal applied this principle to hold that the earlier confirmation of demand for the six months preceding the notice was inconsistent with the governing rule, and the demand for that prior period was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98870</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>