<?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 (12) TMI 446 - GUJARAT  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204427</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for tax recovery required proof of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or deliberate contravention with intent to evade duty. On the material described, disclosure of the use and clearance of steam, together with a bona fide basis for treating fuel-used inputs as outside the credit restriction, did not support an allegation of suppression, and the legal position was not settled against the assessee at the relevant time. The Tribunal also had not recorded a reasoned finding on suppression. In these circumstances, the extended period was not available and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 12:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 446 - GUJARAT  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204427</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for tax recovery required proof of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or deliberate contravention with intent to evade duty. On the material described, disclosure of the use and clearance of steam, together with a bona fide basis for treating fuel-used inputs as outside the credit restriction, did not support an allegation of suppression, and the legal position was not settled against the assessee at the relevant time. The Tribunal also had not recorded a reasoned finding on suppression. In these circumstances, the extended period was not available and no substantial question of law arose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>