<?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>2002 (12) TMI 561 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122445</link>
    <description>SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was allowed where the mark &quot;National&quot; was not shown to be exclusively owned by another person and appeared to be used in the public domain without indicating a trade connection with a different proprietor. On settlement, the duty liability was recomputed after allowing SSI exemption and cum-sales tax treatment, with immunity granted from fine and penalty on disclosure and cooperation, but immunity from prosecution was refused because prosecution had already been initiated. Simple interest at 10% was also directed on the duty evaded for the relevant period, with the balance duty remaining payable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:57:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 561 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122445</link>
      <description>SSI exemption under Notification No. 1/93-C.E. was allowed where the mark &quot;National&quot; was not shown to be exclusively owned by another person and appeared to be used in the public domain without indicating a trade connection with a different proprietor. On settlement, the duty liability was recomputed after allowing SSI exemption and cum-sales tax treatment, with immunity granted from fine and penalty on disclosure and cooperation, but immunity from prosecution was refused because prosecution had already been initiated. Simple interest at 10% was also directed on the duty evaded for the relevant period, with the balance duty remaining payable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>