<?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>2006 (2) TMI 684 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195830</link>
    <description>Clearances from two differently constituted units were aggregable for small scale exemption where production and clearances were made from the same factory facilities. Vent plugs and filter discs used as battery parts were classifiable under Heading 85.07 for electrical accumulators rather than as residual plastic goods. Extended limitation applied because the true nature of manufacture was not properly disclosed. Penalties were reduced, confiscation of immovable assets was set aside, and limited redemption fines on seized goods and machinery were sustained. Duty was remanded for re-quantification after allowing input duty credit, subject to verification, and treating the sale price as cum-duty price.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Nov 2017 12:24:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495634" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 684 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195830</link>
      <description>Clearances from two differently constituted units were aggregable for small scale exemption where production and clearances were made from the same factory facilities. Vent plugs and filter discs used as battery parts were classifiable under Heading 85.07 for electrical accumulators rather than as residual plastic goods. Extended limitation applied because the true nature of manufacture was not properly disclosed. Penalties were reduced, confiscation of immovable assets was set aside, and limited redemption fines on seized goods and machinery were sustained. Duty was remanded for re-quantification after allowing input duty credit, subject to verification, and treating the sale price as cum-duty price.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195830</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>