<?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>2013 (6) TMI 391 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234566</link>
    <description>Disclosure in the assessee&#039;s declaration of the value of clearances of dutiable and exempted goods showed that the aggregate turnover exceeded the small scale exemption limit, so the department already had the relevant facts. In that situation, a much later show cause notice could not be justified on suppression or misstatement, and the extended limitation period was not available. The demand was therefore barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2015 11:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=196976" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 391 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234566</link>
      <description>Disclosure in the assessee&#039;s declaration of the value of clearances of dutiable and exempted goods showed that the aggregate turnover exceeded the small scale exemption limit, so the department already had the relevant facts. In that situation, a much later show cause notice could not be justified on suppression or misstatement, and the extended limitation period was not available. The demand was therefore barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234566</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>