<?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 (6) TMI 470 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106390</link>
    <description>Marketability determines whether captively consumed polypropylene filament yarn is excisable: stock retention, absence of evidence of an unmarketably short shelf-life, and prior market purchases support capability of being bought and sold. Non-disclosure of manufacture and captive use permits the extended limitation period and defeats a revenue-neutrality defence on the stated facts. Modvat credit reversed on the belief that goods were non-dutiable may be adjusted against duty subsequently confirmed. Captive removal without duty payment may attract penalty, but cumulative penalties under multiple provisions may be excessive; credit adjustment and a reduced penalty were applied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:44:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143424" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (6) TMI 470 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106390</link>
      <description>Marketability determines whether captively consumed polypropylene filament yarn is excisable: stock retention, absence of evidence of an unmarketably short shelf-life, and prior market purchases support capability of being bought and sold. Non-disclosure of manufacture and captive use permits the extended limitation period and defeats a revenue-neutrality defence on the stated facts. Modvat credit reversed on the belief that goods were non-dutiable may be adjusted against duty subsequently confirmed. Captive removal without duty payment may attract penalty, but cumulative penalties under multiple provisions may be excessive; credit adjustment and a reduced penalty were applied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106390</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>