<?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 (11) TMI 558 - CEGAT,  KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107241</link>
    <description>Where manufacturing facts and nil-rate clearance of hard waste were disclosed in approved classification lists, the demand could not be extended beyond the normal limitation period absent suppression or intent to evade duty. The Department&#039;s awareness, coupled with the opportunity to verify the position at the approval stage, defeated invocation of the extended period. The demand raised beyond the normal period was therefore time-barred in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 18:06:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 558 - CEGAT,  KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107241</link>
      <description>Where manufacturing facts and nil-rate clearance of hard waste were disclosed in approved classification lists, the demand could not be extended beyond the normal limitation period absent suppression or intent to evade duty. The Department&#039;s awareness, coupled with the opportunity to verify the position at the approval stage, defeated invocation of the extended period. The demand raised beyond the normal period was therefore time-barred in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>