<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1145 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209470</link>
    <description>An excise complaint alleging duty evasion could not survive once the competent authority finally held that the disputed amounts were not chargeable in the assessable value and dropped the demand. The record showed that the assessee had initially paid the demand and pursued the statutory challenge, but the final liability determination found the demand unsustainable on incorrect valuation and non-chargeability of duty. In that situation, the factual basis for alleging deliberate withholding of duty or criminal intent to evade duty disappeared, making refusal to discharge unsustainable and entitling the petitioner to discharge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2013 17:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182917" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1145 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209470</link>
      <description>An excise complaint alleging duty evasion could not survive once the competent authority finally held that the disputed amounts were not chargeable in the assessable value and dropped the demand. The record showed that the assessee had initially paid the demand and pursued the statutory challenge, but the final liability determination found the demand unsustainable on incorrect valuation and non-chargeability of duty. In that situation, the factual basis for alleging deliberate withholding of duty or criminal intent to evade duty disappeared, making refusal to discharge unsustainable and entitling the petitioner to discharge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209470</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>