<?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 (5) TMI 179 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53048</link>
    <description>An SSI exemption notification required a manufacturer to exercise the option in writing before first clearances and to intimate the jurisdictional officer in the prescribed manner. A declaration filed under Rule 173B for a previous financial year could not substitute for that mandatory yearly option, so exemption was unavailable for clearances made before proper exercise of option and the duty demand was sustained. On penalty, the delayed option was treated as a bona fide mistake with no mala fide intent shown, so the penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 12:21:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91525" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 179 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53048</link>
      <description>An SSI exemption notification required a manufacturer to exercise the option in writing before first clearances and to intimate the jurisdictional officer in the prescribed manner. A declaration filed under Rule 173B for a previous financial year could not substitute for that mandatory yearly option, so exemption was unavailable for clearances made before proper exercise of option and the duty demand was sustained. On penalty, the delayed option was treated as a bona fide mistake with no mala fide intent shown, so the penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>