<?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>2018 (1) TMI 107 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353371</link>
    <description>The extended limitation period could not be invoked for reversal of deemed credit because the department failed to establish suppression of facts or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty. The assessee had filed the required declaration, maintained accounts and reflected stock particulars in its records, and the department relied on those same records to allege excess credit. As the relevant material was already available from the assessee&#039;s own documents and no independent basis for alleging evasion was shown, limitation was decided in favour of the assessee and the demand, including penalty, was set aside without examination of merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=502454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 107 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353371</link>
      <description>The extended limitation period could not be invoked for reversal of deemed credit because the department failed to establish suppression of facts or wilful misstatement with intent to evade duty. The assessee had filed the required declaration, maintained accounts and reflected stock particulars in its records, and the department relied on those same records to allege excess credit. As the relevant material was already available from the assessee&#039;s own documents and no independent basis for alleging evasion was shown, limitation was decided in favour of the assessee and the demand, including penalty, was set aside without examination of merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>