<?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>1989 (11) TMI 53 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42924</link>
    <description>A show cause notice is valid where it only sets out the authority&#039;s revised view on exemption and classification and the basis for proposed action; disclosure of that basis does not amount to prejudgment. Duty may also be recovered for the statutory period preceding the notice under the recovery provision then in force, and such demand is not invalid merely because the department earlier held a different view. An approved classification list and prior inaction do not bar correction of an incorrect classification, because there is no estoppel against law in tax matters. The duty demand was therefore sustained only for the limited period allowed by the later relief notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2018 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (11) TMI 53 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42924</link>
      <description>A show cause notice is valid where it only sets out the authority&#039;s revised view on exemption and classification and the basis for proposed action; disclosure of that basis does not amount to prejudgment. Duty may also be recovered for the statutory period preceding the notice under the recovery provision then in force, and such demand is not invalid merely because the department earlier held a different view. An approved classification list and prior inaction do not bar correction of an incorrect classification, because there is no estoppel against law in tax matters. The duty demand was therefore sustained only for the limited period allowed by the later relief notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42924</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>