<?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>2003 (1) TMI 168 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51845</link>
    <description>Goods that are complete in all material respects and capable of being cleared and sold are treated as marketable and therefore dutiable, even if testing remains pending. Non-entry in the RG 1 register does not by itself make the goods non-manufactured or non-marketable, and the assessee must prove otherwise. Remission of duty was also denied because theft alone was not accepted as sufficient ground on the facts found. The duty demand was upheld against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 18:05:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 168 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51845</link>
      <description>Goods that are complete in all material respects and capable of being cleared and sold are treated as marketable and therefore dutiable, even if testing remains pending. Non-entry in the RG 1 register does not by itself make the goods non-manufactured or non-marketable, and the assessee must prove otherwise. Remission of duty was also denied because theft alone was not accepted as sufficient ground on the facts found. The duty demand was upheld against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>