<?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>2001 (4) TMI 132 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50556</link>
    <description>Jaljira was held classifiable under Chapter 21 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, because in trade and common parlance it was understood as a drink to be mixed with water and not as a spice or condiment under Chapter 9; the product&#039;s packing and the Board&#039;s later clarification supported that classification. The extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the notice did not specifically plead suppression or other culpable conduct, and the assessee had already informed the department about manufacture of jaljira. The duty demand and penalty for the relevant period were therefore time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:45:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89036" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 132 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50556</link>
      <description>Jaljira was held classifiable under Chapter 21 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, because in trade and common parlance it was understood as a drink to be mixed with water and not as a spice or condiment under Chapter 9; the product&#039;s packing and the Board&#039;s later clarification supported that classification. The extended period under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 could not be invoked because the notice did not specifically plead suppression or other culpable conduct, and the assessee had already informed the department about manufacture of jaljira. The duty demand and penalty for the relevant period were therefore time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>