<?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>2020 (6) TMI 592 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396217</link>
    <description>Clearances of capital goods disclosed in ER-2 returns put the relevant facts within the Department&#039;s knowledge, so suppression could not be alleged. On that basis, the statutory ingredients for invoking the extended period under section 11A were not established, and the demand was held time-barred. The order confirming duty, penalty and interest could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:07:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615978" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 592 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396217</link>
      <description>Clearances of capital goods disclosed in ER-2 returns put the relevant facts within the Department&#039;s knowledge, so suppression could not be alleged. On that basis, the statutory ingredients for invoking the extended period under section 11A were not established, and the demand was held time-barred. The order confirming duty, penalty and interest could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>