<?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 (9) TMI 176 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53289</link>
    <description>Suppression of material facts justified invocation of the extended limitation period where the assessee failed to disclose complete scrap-generation details, did not file the relevant returns or declaration, and maintained separate clearance invoices, so the demand was not time-barred. Metal waste and scrap arising from mechanical working of virgin metal was held dutiable and correctly classifiable under Chapter 72 on the basis of workshop machinery and the nature of the operations performed. Penalty remained sustainable in principle, but Section 11AC could not apply retrospectively to the earlier part of the period, so the combined penalty was reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:36:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91766" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 176 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53289</link>
      <description>Suppression of material facts justified invocation of the extended limitation period where the assessee failed to disclose complete scrap-generation details, did not file the relevant returns or declaration, and maintained separate clearance invoices, so the demand was not time-barred. Metal waste and scrap arising from mechanical working of virgin metal was held dutiable and correctly classifiable under Chapter 72 on the basis of workshop machinery and the nature of the operations performed. Penalty remained sustainable in principle, but Section 11AC could not apply retrospectively to the earlier part of the period, so the combined penalty was reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>