<?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>2002 (1) TMI 875 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101887</link>
    <description>Substantial compliance with the prescribed closure and restart intimations under the compounded levy rules was treated as sufficient for abatement of duty where the communications contained the required particulars, including stock position and electricity meter readings, and continuous closure was not disputed. For the restart intimation, where the relevant office was closed on the last day for giving notice, Section 10(1) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 treated delivery on the next working day as timely. On that basis, duty relief was available for both closure periods and the rejection of abatement was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:29:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 875 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101887</link>
      <description>Substantial compliance with the prescribed closure and restart intimations under the compounded levy rules was treated as sufficient for abatement of duty where the communications contained the required particulars, including stock position and electricity meter readings, and continuous closure was not disputed. For the restart intimation, where the relevant office was closed on the last day for giving notice, Section 10(1) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 treated delivery on the next working day as timely. On that basis, duty relief was available for both closure periods and the rejection of abatement was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101887</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>