<?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>2004 (3) TMI 530 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111526</link>
    <description>Cess on crude oil under the Oil Industry (Development) Act, 1974 was payable with reference to the quantity actually received in the refinery, as Section 15 directs collection on that basis and Section 2(e) defines crude oil in its natural stage after removal of water and foreign substances. In closed pipeline supplies, the quantity was measured only after receipt and settling in the refinery, and in other supplies an average water factor was applied with certification of the quantity actually received. As the record did not show payment on a lesser quantity than what was actually received, the department failed to establish short-payment under the Act. The demand of cess and the connected penalties were therefore not sustainable and were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:28:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148542" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 530 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111526</link>
      <description>Cess on crude oil under the Oil Industry (Development) Act, 1974 was payable with reference to the quantity actually received in the refinery, as Section 15 directs collection on that basis and Section 2(e) defines crude oil in its natural stage after removal of water and foreign substances. In closed pipeline supplies, the quantity was measured only after receipt and settling in the refinery, and in other supplies an average water factor was applied with certification of the quantity actually received. As the record did not show payment on a lesser quantity than what was actually received, the department failed to establish short-payment under the Act. The demand of cess and the connected penalties were therefore not sustainable and were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>