<?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>2004 (1) TMI 225 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52907</link>
    <description>Goods cleared for use in internal combustion engines were held classifiable under Heading 84.09 as parts specifically suitable for engines, not under Heading 84.32 as parts of power tillers. The non-disclosure of their true use in classification declarations amounted to suppression of material facts, so the extended period of limitation was correctly invoked and the demand was not time-barred. Penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB, however, could not be applied to the period before 28-9-1996 because those provisions operated prospectively; liability for penalty and interest was therefore required to be re-determined for the later period only.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 13:39:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 225 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52907</link>
      <description>Goods cleared for use in internal combustion engines were held classifiable under Heading 84.09 as parts specifically suitable for engines, not under Heading 84.32 as parts of power tillers. The non-disclosure of their true use in classification declarations amounted to suppression of material facts, so the extended period of limitation was correctly invoked and the demand was not time-barred. Penalty under Section 11AC and interest under Section 11AB, however, could not be applied to the period before 28-9-1996 because those provisions operated prospectively; liability for penalty and interest was therefore required to be re-determined for the later period only.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52907</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>