<?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>2008 (11) TMI 205 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34428</link>
    <description>Low diesel oil cleared after being mixed with furnace oil did not lose its duty liability merely because it was cleared as part of a mixed product; the assessee had to pay the differential between the duty already paid on furnace oil and the duty payable on the low diesel oil component. Mere operational difficulty in removing small quantities from storage tanks did not justify treating the goods as exempt or unmarketable, and remission under Rule 21 would have been the proper route if the goods were unfit for marketing as such. Penalties were set aside because the clearance was made under a bona fide belief and the facts did not show intent to evade duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 205 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34428</link>
      <description>Low diesel oil cleared after being mixed with furnace oil did not lose its duty liability merely because it was cleared as part of a mixed product; the assessee had to pay the differential between the duty already paid on furnace oil and the duty payable on the low diesel oil component. Mere operational difficulty in removing small quantities from storage tanks did not justify treating the goods as exempt or unmarketable, and remission under Rule 21 would have been the proper route if the goods were unfit for marketing as such. Penalties were set aside because the clearance was made under a bona fide belief and the facts did not show intent to evade duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34428</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>