<?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>2007 (1) TMI 30 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1288</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was unavailable for copper concentrate not actually received in the factory, because the rule required physical receipt of the input and the record did not show any legally cognisable natural loss such as evaporation or moisture-related shortage. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked because the weighment shortages were already known to departmental officers, the ex-bond bills were assessed by the proper officer, and the assessee&#039;s records disclosed the credit openly; in those circumstances, suppression was absent. The demand was therefore time-barred and the penalties could not survive, even though the credit claim failed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40700" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 30 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1288</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was unavailable for copper concentrate not actually received in the factory, because the rule required physical receipt of the input and the record did not show any legally cognisable natural loss such as evaporation or moisture-related shortage. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked because the weighment shortages were already known to departmental officers, the ex-bond bills were assessed by the proper officer, and the assessee&#039;s records disclosed the credit openly; in those circumstances, suppression was absent. The demand was therefore time-barred and the penalties could not survive, even though the credit claim failed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>