<?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>2006 (9) TMI 420 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120118</link>
    <description>Aluminium and copper transformer coil windings made through a distinct manufacturing process, with defined dimensions, turns, voltage capacity, separate commercial identity and marketability, were classifiable as transformer parts under Heading 8504 rather than insulated wire under Heading 8544. Consistent disclosure of the goods in approved classification lists and returns, together with departmental awareness of the activity, meant there was no suppression or wilful misstatement; the extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable and the demand, penalty and interest were held time-barred. The assessee&#039;s classification was upheld and the entire demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:33:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 420 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120118</link>
      <description>Aluminium and copper transformer coil windings made through a distinct manufacturing process, with defined dimensions, turns, voltage capacity, separate commercial identity and marketability, were classifiable as transformer parts under Heading 8504 rather than insulated wire under Heading 8544. Consistent disclosure of the goods in approved classification lists and returns, together with departmental awareness of the activity, meant there was no suppression or wilful misstatement; the extended period of limitation was therefore unavailable and the demand, penalty and interest were held time-barred. The assessee&#039;s classification was upheld and the entire demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120118</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>