<?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 (12) TMI 437 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114771</link>
    <description>The appeal was disposed of with directions for re-quantification of duty considering Modvat credit, cum-duty price treatment, and inclusion of exports. The classification of M.S. Handles under Heading 7326.90 and S.S. Lifters under Heading 7323.90 was upheld. The longer period of limitation was justified due to misdeclaration by the appellants. Penalties were to be reconsidered post re-quantification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 18:54:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 437 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114771</link>
      <description>The appeal was disposed of with directions for re-quantification of duty considering Modvat credit, cum-duty price treatment, and inclusion of exports. The classification of M.S. Handles under Heading 7326.90 and S.S. Lifters under Heading 7323.90 was upheld. The longer period of limitation was justified due to misdeclaration by the appellants. Penalties were to be reconsidered post re-quantification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>