<?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 (5) TMI 563 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104228</link>
    <description>Clandestine cash collections outside invoices justified excise valuation on comparable assessable values rather than a direct addition of the undisclosed cash to invoice price, because the collections varied and full records were unavailable. The short levy had to be recomputed on a more accurate comparable basis for the relevant period. Deliberate suppression of part of the sale price also warranted application of the extended limitation period, so duty demand for the whole period was sustained. Penalty was upheld on proof of fraudulent suppression, but interest could not be charged for any period before the interest provision came into force, so the interest demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:45:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 563 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104228</link>
      <description>Clandestine cash collections outside invoices justified excise valuation on comparable assessable values rather than a direct addition of the undisclosed cash to invoice price, because the collections varied and full records were unavailable. The short levy had to be recomputed on a more accurate comparable basis for the relevant period. Deliberate suppression of part of the sale price also warranted application of the extended limitation period, so duty demand for the whole period was sustained. Penalty was upheld on proof of fraudulent suppression, but interest could not be charged for any period before the interest provision came into force, so the interest demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104228</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>