<?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>1998 (10) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102931</link>
    <description>An identifiable intermediate product is dutiable if it is marketable, even where it is used captively in manufacture. P.C. acid was treated as a well-defined organic chemical with a definite use, capable of isolation and sufficient shelf life, and captive consumption did not negate excisability because marketability was shown. In addition, incomplete disclosure in the assessee&#039;s classification materials, declaration and write-up amounted to suppression of material facts, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period. The note states that the duty demand and connected penalty were therefore upheld, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:27:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102931</link>
      <description>An identifiable intermediate product is dutiable if it is marketable, even where it is used captively in manufacture. P.C. acid was treated as a well-defined organic chemical with a definite use, capable of isolation and sufficient shelf life, and captive consumption did not negate excisability because marketability was shown. In addition, incomplete disclosure in the assessee&#039;s classification materials, declaration and write-up amounted to suppression of material facts, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period. The note states that the duty demand and connected penalty were therefore upheld, and the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102931</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>