<?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>1984 (4) TMI 286 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167000</link>
    <description>Crude PVC film/sheet was treated as classifiable under Item 15A(2) because the tariff entry for articles made of plastics was wide enough to cover all forms and varieties of films and sheets, and end-use was irrelevant absent express tariff language. Duty on past clearances could be recovered only within the 12-month period permitted by Rule 10 read with Rule 173-J, and the demand notice was not invalid merely because it did not specify the amount where the assessee had not furnished quantification particulars. The earlier appellate order did not bar fresh proceedings in changed circumstances, and the procedural objections failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2014 11:20:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=370028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (4) TMI 286 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167000</link>
      <description>Crude PVC film/sheet was treated as classifiable under Item 15A(2) because the tariff entry for articles made of plastics was wide enough to cover all forms and varieties of films and sheets, and end-use was irrelevant absent express tariff language. Duty on past clearances could be recovered only within the 12-month period permitted by Rule 10 read with Rule 173-J, and the demand notice was not invalid merely because it did not specify the amount where the assessee had not furnished quantification particulars. The earlier appellate order did not bar fresh proceedings in changed circumstances, and the procedural objections failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>