<?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>2001 (5) TMI 678 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100098</link>
    <description>Short-paid central excise duty arising on final determination of annual capacity of production, having been paid before issuance of the show cause notice, left no surviving duty demand, and invocation of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules was unwarranted. Penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB were also not sustainable because the notice did not allege wilful misstatement or wilful suppression of facts, and mandatory liability under those provisions requires the requisite culpable conduct. The discussion distinguished provisional assessment under Rule 9B from final determination under the compounded levy scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:12:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 678 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100098</link>
      <description>Short-paid central excise duty arising on final determination of annual capacity of production, having been paid before issuance of the show cause notice, left no surviving duty demand, and invocation of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules was unwarranted. Penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB were also not sustainable because the notice did not allege wilful misstatement or wilful suppression of facts, and mandatory liability under those provisions requires the requisite culpable conduct. The discussion distinguished provisional assessment under Rule 9B from final determination under the compounded levy scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>