<?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 (2) TMI 214 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50579</link>
    <description>An assessee&#039;s own test report may be relied upon to determine eligibility for concessional duty where it shows that the denier of nylon filament yarn exceeded the permissible tolerance limit and no contrary material rebuts that result. On that basis, duty was correctly confirmed without requiring separate departmental samples. Where the assessee knowingly cleared goods at a concessional rate despite exceeding the tolerance limit and mis-declared the clearance particulars, the extended period of limitation was invokable and penalty was justified for duty evasion. The demand, limitation, and penalty were therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:54:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 214 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50579</link>
      <description>An assessee&#039;s own test report may be relied upon to determine eligibility for concessional duty where it shows that the denier of nylon filament yarn exceeded the permissible tolerance limit and no contrary material rebuts that result. On that basis, duty was correctly confirmed without requiring separate departmental samples. Where the assessee knowingly cleared goods at a concessional rate despite exceeding the tolerance limit and mis-declared the clearance particulars, the extended period of limitation was invokable and penalty was justified for duty evasion. The demand, limitation, and penalty were therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50579</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>