<?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>2008 (8) TMI 688 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124657</link>
    <description>The court found that the assessee&#039;s use of proforma invoices to clear goods did not constitute sales but stock transfers. The demand notice issued beyond the statutory six-month period was deemed time-barred, leading to the unsustainable imposition of penalties. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the duty to comply with payment regulations, the repercussions of concealing facts, and the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in taxation matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 18:14:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 688 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124657</link>
      <description>The court found that the assessee&#039;s use of proforma invoices to clear goods did not constitute sales but stock transfers. The demand notice issued beyond the statutory six-month period was deemed time-barred, leading to the unsustainable imposition of penalties. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the duty to comply with payment regulations, the repercussions of concealing facts, and the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in taxation matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>