<?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 (7) TMI 1055 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363747</link>
    <description>An exemption for wagons under Notification No. 64/95-CE applied only where the wagons were intended for use by Indian Railways. The court found that the contract materials showed procurement for oil companies under the Own Your Wagon Scheme, with the railway administration acting only as a facilitator, so the exemption condition was not satisfied. On limitation, the department&#039;s lack of prior knowledge and the finding of suppression of material facts justified invocation of the extended period for duty demand, penalty and interest. The appeal therefore failed on both merits and limitation, and the demand and penalty were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2018 06:12:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=527318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 1055 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363747</link>
      <description>An exemption for wagons under Notification No. 64/95-CE applied only where the wagons were intended for use by Indian Railways. The court found that the contract materials showed procurement for oil companies under the Own Your Wagon Scheme, with the railway administration acting only as a facilitator, so the exemption condition was not satisfied. On limitation, the department&#039;s lack of prior knowledge and the finding of suppression of material facts justified invocation of the extended period for duty demand, penalty and interest. The appeal therefore failed on both merits and limitation, and the demand and penalty were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>