<?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 (9) TMI 494 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237062</link>
    <description>Waste such as fents, rags and chindies arising during manufacture of export goods was held assessable only as waste under the governing exemption notifications, because those notifications specifically prescribed the duty treatment for waste generated in processing and did not permit classification as fresh fabrics. The procedural requirements for bond execution, AR-3 movement, declarations and returns did not alter that levy position. On limitation, regular disclosure of receipts, consumption, waste generation and waste clearances in declarations and returns meant suppression was not established, so the extended period could not be invoked and the related penalty could not be sustained. The assessees&#039; challenge succeeded and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 494 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237062</link>
      <description>Waste such as fents, rags and chindies arising during manufacture of export goods was held assessable only as waste under the governing exemption notifications, because those notifications specifically prescribed the duty treatment for waste generated in processing and did not permit classification as fresh fabrics. The procedural requirements for bond execution, AR-3 movement, declarations and returns did not alter that levy position. On limitation, regular disclosure of receipts, consumption, waste generation and waste clearances in declarations and returns meant suppression was not established, so the extended period could not be invoked and the related penalty could not be sustained. The assessees&#039; challenge succeeded and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237062</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>