<?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 (7) TMI 126 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51954</link>
    <description>Goods cleared by an export oriented unit to the domestic tariff area are assessable under the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 at the effective rate prescribed by the applicable notification, not at the tariff rate, and duty must be recomputed accordingly. Penalty under Rule 209 of the Central Excise Rules is not warranted where the clearance was made with departmental knowledge and on prescribed documents, and the dispute concerns interpretation rather than fraud or contumacious conduct.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:58:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 126 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51954</link>
      <description>Goods cleared by an export oriented unit to the domestic tariff area are assessable under the proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 at the effective rate prescribed by the applicable notification, not at the tariff rate, and duty must be recomputed accordingly. Penalty under Rule 209 of the Central Excise Rules is not warranted where the clearance was made with departmental knowledge and on prescribed documents, and the dispute concerns interpretation rather than fraud or contumacious conduct.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>