<?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 (7) TMI 586 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204520</link>
    <description>Where a manufacturer validly intimates closure and modification of machinery parameters, the re-determined annual capacity of production must apply for the relevant period, and the deemed base-year capacity cannot be retained. The scheme for deemed capacity operates only where there is no change in parameters during the relevant period. On the stated facts, closure, modification and departmental verification were undisputed, so the revised capacity of 880.5 MT/annum governed the period after intimation. The contrary adoption of the base-year capacity was not justified, and duty liability was to be worked out on the basis of the re-determined capacity with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 May 2011 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 586 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204520</link>
      <description>Where a manufacturer validly intimates closure and modification of machinery parameters, the re-determined annual capacity of production must apply for the relevant period, and the deemed base-year capacity cannot be retained. The scheme for deemed capacity operates only where there is no change in parameters during the relevant period. On the stated facts, closure, modification and departmental verification were undisputed, so the revised capacity of 880.5 MT/annum governed the period after intimation. The contrary adoption of the base-year capacity was not justified, and duty liability was to be worked out on the basis of the re-determined capacity with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204520</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>