<?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>2009 (5) TMI 105 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35503</link>
    <description>Air-covered polyester and nylon yarn was held classifiable under Chapter Heading 5402 because covered yarn requires a core and winding arrangement, which the product lacked. The claim for Chapter Heading 5606 was rejected. The extended period of limitation was found unavailable because the department had knowledge of the manufacturing process and there was no suppression or wilful misstatement; recovery was therefore confined to the normal period. Duty on DTA clearances under Notification No. 2/95-C.E. was remanded for fresh computation, as the pre-01.03.2002 formula and the interaction with excise duty on like goods required reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=74090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 105 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35503</link>
      <description>Air-covered polyester and nylon yarn was held classifiable under Chapter Heading 5402 because covered yarn requires a core and winding arrangement, which the product lacked. The claim for Chapter Heading 5606 was rejected. The extended period of limitation was found unavailable because the department had knowledge of the manufacturing process and there was no suppression or wilful misstatement; recovery was therefore confined to the normal period. Duty on DTA clearances under Notification No. 2/95-C.E. was remanded for fresh computation, as the pre-01.03.2002 formula and the interaction with excise duty on like goods required reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>