<?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 (4) TMI 380 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, N</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111694</link>
    <description>Duty under the compounded levy scheme was confined to the period of actual factory operation where closure for part of the year was admitted, and the absence of surrender of the registration certificate was not decisive. The proviso to Section 3A(2) required proportionate assessment in such circumstances, so no duty was payable for the closed period. On settlement, the applicant&#039;s full and true disclosure, payment of the admitted amount, and cooperation satisfied the statutory conditions, and immunity from interest and penalty was granted. The matter was settled on the terms recorded by the Commission.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:33:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 380 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, N</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111694</link>
      <description>Duty under the compounded levy scheme was confined to the period of actual factory operation where closure for part of the year was admitted, and the absence of surrender of the registration certificate was not decisive. The proviso to Section 3A(2) required proportionate assessment in such circumstances, so no duty was payable for the closed period. On settlement, the applicant&#039;s full and true disclosure, payment of the admitted amount, and cooperation satisfied the statutory conditions, and immunity from interest and penalty was granted. The matter was settled on the terms recorded by the Commission.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111694</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>