<?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 (9) TMI 132 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50645</link>
    <description>Roasted peanuts and moongfali masala majedar were treated as preparations of nuts under Chapter 20, not as namkeens under Heading 21.08, because roasting, salting, mixing with gram flour and spices, and frying altered the goods beyond their natural form while the residuary heading remained inapplicable. Non-disclosure of the manufactured products to the Department was treated as suppression, so the extended period of limitation and penalty provisions were held invocable. Duty was to be recomputed on a cum-duty basis, and the penalties were sustained, with only the personal penalty on the individual noticee reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:23:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89124" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 132 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50645</link>
      <description>Roasted peanuts and moongfali masala majedar were treated as preparations of nuts under Chapter 20, not as namkeens under Heading 21.08, because roasting, salting, mixing with gram flour and spices, and frying altered the goods beyond their natural form while the residuary heading remained inapplicable. Non-disclosure of the manufactured products to the Department was treated as suppression, so the extended period of limitation and penalty provisions were held invocable. Duty was to be recomputed on a cum-duty basis, and the penalties were sustained, with only the personal penalty on the individual noticee reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>