<?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>1998 (8) TMI 620 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185133</link>
    <description>Packing duty-paid components into a cable jointing kit did not amount to manufacture because the components retained their identity and were not transformed into a new commercially distinct product with a different name, character and use; the kit was therefore not dutiable on that basis. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the demand rested on a departmental circular issued amid acknowledged doubt on excisability and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief that the process was not manufacture, so suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. The duty demand and penalty were consequently unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 17:04:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 620 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185133</link>
      <description>Packing duty-paid components into a cable jointing kit did not amount to manufacture because the components retained their identity and were not transformed into a new commercially distinct product with a different name, character and use; the kit was therefore not dutiable on that basis. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the demand rested on a departmental circular issued amid acknowledged doubt on excisability and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief that the process was not manufacture, so suppression with intent to evade duty was not established. The duty demand and penalty were consequently unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>