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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Appellate tribunal rules in favor of appellants due to lack of evidence in clandestine goods removal case.</h1> <h3>Bhawani Moulders Pvt. Ltd., Shri Vikas Agarwal, Shri Vijay Kumar Agarwal Versus C.C.E., Raipur</h3> The appellate tribunal set aside the charge of clandestine removal of goods due to insufficient evidence, except for confirming duty demand related to a ... Clandestine removal - MS Ingots - demand of duty, interest and penalty - the case of the Revenue is based on the note book recovered from the possession of Shri Sarat Kumar Das (Supervisor of Shri Purna Ramdas Labour Contractor) and the various statements. Held that: - No such evidences to the above effect has been brought by the Revenue on record therefore, the demand is not sustainable against the appellant alleging clandestine removal. Moreover, we also take note of the fact that pilot experiments were conducted to ascertain the electricity consumption for manufacturing of One MT of MS ingot twice and same were found in order therefore, Revenue has failed to establish how the goods were manufactured in the factory of the appellants - As there is no positive evidence has been produced by the Revenue to allege clandestine removal goods, therefore the impugned order is not sustainable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:- Allegation of clandestine clearance of finished goods- Reliability of evidence based on statements and note book- Retraction of statement by Shri Sarat Kumar Das- Examination of contents of note book- Adverse findings without examining makers of statements- Lack of positive evidence for clandestine removal of goodsAnalysis:1. The case involves an appeal against an order confirming duty demand on the allegation of clandestine clearance of finished goods, along with interest and penalty on all appellants. The facts include a search revealing finished goods and a note book containing loading and unloading details, leading to a Show Cause Notice and subsequent confirmation of duty demand, interest, and penalty.2. The appellant's advocate argued that the case heavily relies on Shri Sarat Kumar Das's statement and the note book, emphasizing Das's retraction through a sworn affidavit. The advocate pointed out discrepancies in the note book entries, lack of confrontation with relevant parties, and absence of evidence from customers, production managers, or directors. The advocate also questioned the adequacy of evidence regarding alleged clandestine removal of goods.3. The appellate tribunal noted the retraction of Das's statement through an affidavit and emphasized the need to consider such retractions, citing legal precedents. The tribunal found shortcomings in the investigation, including the lack of efforts to verify note book contents with other entities mentioned and the absence of confrontations with relevant individuals.4. The tribunal highlighted the necessity of tangible, direct, and incontrovertible evidence to prove clandestine removal of goods, as established in previous judgments. It noted the absence of such evidence in the case at hand, including discrepancies in electricity consumption and lack of proof regarding manufacturing processes.5. Ultimately, the tribunal set aside the charge of clandestine removal of goods due to insufficient evidence, except for confirming the duty demand related to the shortage of finished goods during the investigation. The decision was based on the lack of positive evidence supporting the allegation of clandestine removal, leading to the confirmation of duty demand with interest and the imposition of a penalty on the appellant.6. The judgment was pronounced on January 2, 2017, highlighting the tribunal's detailed analysis of the evidence, retraction of statements, and the legal standards required to establish allegations of clandestine activities in excise matters.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found