<?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 (11) TMI 494 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116078</link>
    <description>Annual capacity under the compounded levy scheme must be computed only by counting furnaces that were actually functional and operating during the relevant period. A furnace that remained closed, or was later dismantled, cannot be treated as part of operative capacity merely because it had been installed or was theoretically capable of production. The capacity determination was therefore set aside for including non-operational furnaces, and the matter was remanded for redetermination after excluding periods of non-operation and after hearing the assessee. Demand and penalty based on the impugned computation could not be sustained as framed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 10:51:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153076" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 494 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116078</link>
      <description>Annual capacity under the compounded levy scheme must be computed only by counting furnaces that were actually functional and operating during the relevant period. A furnace that remained closed, or was later dismantled, cannot be treated as part of operative capacity merely because it had been installed or was theoretically capable of production. The capacity determination was therefore set aside for including non-operational furnaces, and the matter was remanded for redetermination after excluding periods of non-operation and after hearing the assessee. Demand and penalty based on the impugned computation could not be sustained as framed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116078</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>