<?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>1993 (9) TMI 368 - CEGAT NEW DELHI (SPECIAL BENCH)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288748</link>
    <description>Rolled metal tyres cleared in a forged or roughly shaped stage were held classifiable under Chapter 72, not as parts of railway rolling stock under Chapter 86, because they had not yet acquired the essential character of finished railway tyres and required substantial further machining and finishing. Note 2(a) to Chapter 86 was therefore inapplicable at the time of clearance. On limitation, approved classification lists and departmental awareness of the manufacturing activity negatived suppression or wilful misstatement, so invocation of the extended period was not justified. The demand was thus time-barred, and the consequential penalties and reliefs were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:03:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=616035" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (9) TMI 368 - CEGAT NEW DELHI (SPECIAL BENCH)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288748</link>
      <description>Rolled metal tyres cleared in a forged or roughly shaped stage were held classifiable under Chapter 72, not as parts of railway rolling stock under Chapter 86, because they had not yet acquired the essential character of finished railway tyres and required substantial further machining and finishing. Note 2(a) to Chapter 86 was therefore inapplicable at the time of clearance. On limitation, approved classification lists and departmental awareness of the manufacturing activity negatived suppression or wilful misstatement, so invocation of the extended period was not justified. The demand was thus time-barred, and the consequential penalties and reliefs were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>