<?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>1985 (1) TMI 322 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167382</link>
    <description>Drawing round bars into bright bars was treated as manufacture because the process produced a commercially distinct new product with a different name, character and use; scrap generated in the process was also an excisable item. Exempted excisable goods were still required to be included in computing aggregate clearances under the exemption notification, because exemption did not remove their excisable character and the term &quot;clearances&quot; covered removals whether duty was paid or not, unless the notification expressly provided otherwise. Bona fide disclosure of facts and filing of classification lists negatived suppression, so penalty was not sustainable. Insurance charges were allowable as a deduction where supported by proof.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 11:35:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (1) TMI 322 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167382</link>
      <description>Drawing round bars into bright bars was treated as manufacture because the process produced a commercially distinct new product with a different name, character and use; scrap generated in the process was also an excisable item. Exempted excisable goods were still required to be included in computing aggregate clearances under the exemption notification, because exemption did not remove their excisable character and the term &quot;clearances&quot; covered removals whether duty was paid or not, unless the notification expressly provided otherwise. Bona fide disclosure of facts and filing of classification lists negatived suppression, so penalty was not sustainable. Insurance charges were allowable as a deduction where supported by proof.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167382</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>