<?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>2002 (9) TMI 219 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51680</link>
    <description>A wrong tariff classification by itself does not establish wilful suppression or misdeclaration for extending limitation. The product was disclosed as Jaljira powder in the classification list, and the reference to heading 09.03 was treated as a generic description used with other products. As the record showed no deliberate withholding of material facts, the ingredients for invoking the extended period were absent, and the duty demand based on that period could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:41:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 219 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51680</link>
      <description>A wrong tariff classification by itself does not establish wilful suppression or misdeclaration for extending limitation. The product was disclosed as Jaljira powder in the classification list, and the reference to heading 09.03 was treated as a generic description used with other products. As the record showed no deliberate withholding of material facts, the ingredients for invoking the extended period were absent, and the duty demand based on that period could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>