<?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>2003 (5) TMI 392 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108990</link>
    <description>Regular filing of RT-12 returns with supporting documents, accepted by the Revenue, defeated the allegation of suppression of material facts for invoking the extended period in relation to Modvat credit. As the documents supporting the credit were not shown to be non-genuine, the basis for alleging intent to evade duty was not made out, and the demand was treated as time-barred. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:56:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 392 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108990</link>
      <description>Regular filing of RT-12 returns with supporting documents, accepted by the Revenue, defeated the allegation of suppression of material facts for invoking the extended period in relation to Modvat credit. As the documents supporting the credit were not shown to be non-genuine, the basis for alleging intent to evade duty was not made out, and the demand was treated as time-barred. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108990</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>