<?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 162 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50750</link>
    <description>Non-supply of original invoices did not vitiate adjudication where the invoices were already available to the assessee and no prejudice was shown. Job-work on laminations and winding wire, involving processes such as winding, end cutting, coil setting, core processing and aluminium coating, produced distinct goods described as stators and rotors; the activity was treated as manufacture and attracted duty. The extended period of limitation was held applicable because clearances were made under commercial invoices without departmental intimation, relevant declarations, or proper reflection in statutory records, and no credible bona fide belief of non-excisability was established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 12:40:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89229" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 162 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50750</link>
      <description>Non-supply of original invoices did not vitiate adjudication where the invoices were already available to the assessee and no prejudice was shown. Job-work on laminations and winding wire, involving processes such as winding, end cutting, coil setting, core processing and aluminium coating, produced distinct goods described as stators and rotors; the activity was treated as manufacture and attracted duty. The extended period of limitation was held applicable because clearances were made under commercial invoices without departmental intimation, relevant declarations, or proper reflection in statutory records, and no credible bona fide belief of non-excisability was established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>