<?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 (7) TMI 188 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50703</link>
    <description>For valuation purposes, turnover tax deductible from assessable value was limited to the tax actually payable in the relevant area, not a higher notional rate; the deduction was therefore confined to the reduced rate. Suppression of the fact that the lower rate applied justified use of the extended limitation period until departmental knowledge was obtained, but the demand was time-barred thereafter. Penalty and interest under later-introduced provisions applied only prospectively, and personal penalties on the individual appellants were not sustained. The matter was remitted for re-quantification of duty, penalty and interest in line with these findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:57:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 188 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50703</link>
      <description>For valuation purposes, turnover tax deductible from assessable value was limited to the tax actually payable in the relevant area, not a higher notional rate; the deduction was therefore confined to the reduced rate. Suppression of the fact that the lower rate applied justified use of the extended limitation period until departmental knowledge was obtained, but the demand was time-barred thereafter. Penalty and interest under later-introduced provisions applied only prospectively, and personal penalties on the individual appellants were not sustained. The matter was remitted for re-quantification of duty, penalty and interest in line with these findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50703</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>