<?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 (6) TMI 434 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121051</link>
    <description>Conversion of solid sodium silicate into liquid sodium silicate was treated as not amounting to manufacture, following an earlier ruling on the same process. The Bench also noted that the extended period of limitation had been disallowed earlier on the basis of bona fide belief. On that footing, the assessee established a prima facie case against the duty demand, and pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived while recovery was stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 434 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121051</link>
      <description>Conversion of solid sodium silicate into liquid sodium silicate was treated as not amounting to manufacture, following an earlier ruling on the same process. The Bench also noted that the extended period of limitation had been disallowed earlier on the basis of bona fide belief. On that footing, the assessee established a prima facie case against the duty demand, and pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived while recovery was stayed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121051</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>