Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Central Excise

        2006 (7) TMI 78 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Confiscation and presumptive demand fail without evidence, but duty on unproved clearance of blankets and related penalty survive. Confiscation of excess finished goods could not be sustained once the goods had been unconditionally released and were no longer available for ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Confiscation and presumptive demand fail without evidence, but duty on unproved clearance of blankets and related penalty survive.

                          Confiscation of excess finished goods could not be sustained once the goods had been unconditionally released and were no longer available for confiscation, so that part of the demand failed. Duty on 497 blankets was upheld because the production slip showed movement of goods to the warehouse and the assessee failed to prove duty-paid clearance, attracting an adverse inference. A demand based on shortage of raw material was set aside because it rested only on presumption without tangible evidence of clandestine removal. Penalty survived only to the extent it related to the sustained duty demand on 497 blankets.




                          Issues: (i) whether confiscation of the excess finished goods found in the factory could be sustained when the goods were released unconditionally and were not available for confiscation; (ii) whether duty demand on 497 blankets was sustainable on the basis of the production slip and absence of proof of duty-paid clearance; (iii) whether duty demand on shortage of raw material could be upheld on a presumptive basis; and (iv) whether penalty could survive in respect of the sustained duty demand.

                          Issue (i): whether confiscation of the excess finished goods found in the factory could be sustained when the goods were released unconditionally and were not available for confiscation.

                          Analysis: The goods seized during the visit had already been released without any conditional bond or security after the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings. In the absence of goods being available on the date of the impugned order, confiscation could not be maintained. The Tribunal also applied the principle that redemption fine or confiscation cannot stand where the goods are not available and there is no continuing bond-backed custody.

                          Conclusion: The confiscation was set aside in favour of the assessee.

                          Issue (ii): whether duty demand on 497 blankets was sustainable on the basis of the production slip and absence of proof of duty-paid clearance.

                          Analysis: The production slip showed transfer of 1504 blankets to warehouse, and the assessee did not establish by records that 497 blankets had been cleared on payment of duty. The explanation of removal for cleaning stains remained unsupported by evidence. In these circumstances, an adverse inference was drawn and the assessee was held not to have discharged the burden of proving duty-paid clearance.

                          Conclusion: The duty demand on 497 blankets was upheld against the assessee.

                          Issue (iii): whether duty demand on shortage of raw material could be upheld on a presumptive basis.

                          Analysis: The notice and the confirmation of demand proceeded on an -based calculation of the finished goods said to have been manufactured from the short raw material, without tangible evidence of clandestine removal. A demand founded on assumptions and presumption, without supporting evidence, could not be sustained.

                          Conclusion: The demand based on shortage of raw material was set aside in favour of the assessee.

                          Issue (iv): whether penalty could survive in respect of the sustained duty demand.

                          Analysis: Penalty could not survive on the issues where confiscation and duty demand were set aside. However, since the duty demand on 497 blankets was sustained, penalty remained justified to that extent.

                          Conclusion: Penalty was upheld only to the extent relatable to the sustained duty demand and was otherwise not interfered with.

                          Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on confiscation and the presumptive raw-material-based demand, but failed on the duty demand relating to 497 blankets and the corresponding penalty to that extent, resulting in partial relief to the assessee.

                          Ratio Decidendi: Confiscation and redemption fine cannot be sustained when the goods are not available for confiscation and were not retained under a bond-backed conditional release, and a duty demand based merely on presumption without tangible evidence of clandestine removal is unsustainable.


                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found