<?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>2009 (11) TMI 729 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153537</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification No. 41/99-C.E. was made conditional on filing the prescribed undertaking with the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, and that condition had to be complied with before the benefit could be claimed. A classification list indicating an intention to avail the notification was held insufficient to substitute for the undertaking, so the exemption was unavailable for the relevant period and the demand was maintained. On penalty, the assessee&#039;s prior declaration and classification list supported a bona fide belief that the requirement was satisfied, so penal consequences were not justified and the penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:36:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170572" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 729 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153537</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification No. 41/99-C.E. was made conditional on filing the prescribed undertaking with the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, and that condition had to be complied with before the benefit could be claimed. A classification list indicating an intention to avail the notification was held insufficient to substitute for the undertaking, so the exemption was unavailable for the relevant period and the demand was maintained. On penalty, the assessee&#039;s prior declaration and classification list supported a bona fide belief that the requirement was satisfied, so penal consequences were not justified and the penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153537</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>