<?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>2016 (8) TMI 891 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331507</link>
    <description>Cutting, bending, grinding and smoothening duty-paid copper tubes into buyer-specific components changed their identity, character and use; the activity was treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the goods were classifiable as parts of gas compressors. For limitation, disclosure of the processing activity and the assessee&#039;s view in the classification list meant suppression was not established, so the earliest demand was time-barred under Section 11A, while later notices were within limitation. On penalty, the absence of suppression and the disclosed bona fide stand removed the factual basis for penalty, which was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2017 11:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439128" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 891 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331507</link>
      <description>Cutting, bending, grinding and smoothening duty-paid copper tubes into buyer-specific components changed their identity, character and use; the activity was treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the goods were classifiable as parts of gas compressors. For limitation, disclosure of the processing activity and the assessee&#039;s view in the classification list meant suppression was not established, so the earliest demand was time-barred under Section 11A, while later notices were within limitation. On penalty, the absence of suppression and the disclosed bona fide stand removed the factual basis for penalty, which was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>