<?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>2024 (9) TMI 1590 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759346</link>
    <description>Zero Air used for Gas Chromatograph testing is classifiable as Zero Air/Synthetic Air under Chapter Heading 2804, not as compressed air under Chapter Heading 2851. Customer statements and the manufacturing process established that its gas composition was suited to laboratory testing and that it was neither compressed air nor a substitute for it; the cited earlier decision was factually distinguishable. Incorrect declaration under Heading 2851 despite the product&#039;s actual character constituted suppression of facts. Payment of duty under the correct classification only after departmental intervention supported invocation of the extended limitation period. The demand and consequential order were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:56:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1590 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759346</link>
      <description>Zero Air used for Gas Chromatograph testing is classifiable as Zero Air/Synthetic Air under Chapter Heading 2804, not as compressed air under Chapter Heading 2851. Customer statements and the manufacturing process established that its gas composition was suited to laboratory testing and that it was neither compressed air nor a substitute for it; the cited earlier decision was factually distinguishable. Incorrect declaration under Heading 2851 despite the product&#039;s actual character constituted suppression of facts. Payment of duty under the correct classification only after departmental intervention supported invocation of the extended limitation period. The demand and consequential order were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>