<?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>2010 (1) TMI 1026 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153531</link>
    <description>An issue conclusively decided in prior adjudication under the compounded levy scheme, and allowed to attain finality, cannot be reopened in later proceedings on the same statutory framework. Where an earlier final order held that the assessee was not an independent processor, the provisional capacity and duty determination dependent on that status ceased to survive. The later authority could not sustain a fresh duty demand, interest, or penalty by isolating part of the relevant period or relying on a statement when the earlier finding had already covered the production period and surrounding facts. The impugned demand and penalty were therefore held unsustainable, and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:16:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 1026 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153531</link>
      <description>An issue conclusively decided in prior adjudication under the compounded levy scheme, and allowed to attain finality, cannot be reopened in later proceedings on the same statutory framework. Where an earlier final order held that the assessee was not an independent processor, the provisional capacity and duty determination dependent on that status ceased to survive. The later authority could not sustain a fresh duty demand, interest, or penalty by isolating part of the relevant period or relying on a statement when the earlier finding had already covered the production period and surrounding facts. The impugned demand and penalty were therefore held unsustainable, and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153531</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>