<?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 (5) TMI 438 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023</link>
    <description>Manufacturers may combine full exemption for one category of goods with concessional duty for another, provided aggregate clearances remain within the applicable exemption threshold. Separate treatment of own manufactured goods and job-work products supported availability of exemption for the Chapter 39 product, requiring the related duty demand and penalty to be set aside. Non-disclosure of conversion of PVA powder into PVA solution constituted suppression of facts and permitted invocation of the extended limitation period. Revenue neutrality did not defeat the demand because the asserted credit benefit was not shown to accrue to the assessee. The exemption entitlement nevertheless resulted in consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 13:55:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 438 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023</link>
      <description>Manufacturers may combine full exemption for one category of goods with concessional duty for another, provided aggregate clearances remain within the applicable exemption threshold. Separate treatment of own manufactured goods and job-work products supported availability of exemption for the Chapter 39 product, requiring the related duty demand and penalty to be set aside. Non-disclosure of conversion of PVA powder into PVA solution constituted suppression of facts and permitted invocation of the extended limitation period. Revenue neutrality did not defeat the demand because the asserted credit benefit was not shown to accrue to the assessee. The exemption entitlement nevertheless resulted in consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>