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

        2018 (3) TMI 329 - 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

        Tribunal overturns duty demand & penalties due to lack of evidence, emphasizing natural justice principles. The Tribunal set aside the demand for duty on alleged clandestine clearance of M.S. Ingots/Risers and disallowance of Cenvat credit due to shortage of ...
                        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.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                            Tribunal overturns duty demand & penalties due to lack of evidence, emphasizing natural justice principles.

                            The Tribunal set aside the demand for duty on alleged clandestine clearance of M.S. Ingots/Risers and disallowance of Cenvat credit due to shortage of Sponge Iron. The allegations were deemed unsubstantiated as there was no credible evidence supporting the claims. The penalties imposed on the appellants were also overturned as they were based on invalid grounds, including denial of the right to cross-examine witnesses. The judgment emphasized the importance of credible evidence and adherence to principles of natural justice, resulting in the favorable outcome for the appellants.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Whether the duty of Rs. 11,01,483/- was rightly confirmed on alleged clandestine clearance of 724.66MT of M.S. Ingots/Risers.
                            2. Whether Cenvat credit of Rs. 5,37,600/- was rightly disallowed on alleged shortage of Sponge Iron.
                            3. Confirmation of penalty on the appellants.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Clandestine Clearance of M.S. Ingots/Risers:
                            The primary issue revolves around the alleged clandestine clearance of 724.66MT of M.S. Ingots/Risers, based on 39 loose slips recovered from the residence of an employee of another group company. The Revenue's allegation is that these slips indicated receipts given by various consignees and were related to clandestine clearances by M/s Sigma Casting Ltd. The slips were allegedly handed over by the Director, and some buyers admitted to receiving goods without Central Excise invoices. However, the appellant contended that the slips did not mention their name, and there was no corroborative evidence such as excessive raw material procurement or electricity usage. The authenticity of the slips was also questioned due to the impracticality of the weighing locations being far from the factory. The statements of certain directors were recorded without allowing cross-examination, which the appellant argued made the evidence unreliable under Section 9D of the Act. The Tribunal found that the statements were inadmissible as evidence since the witnesses were not examined during adjudication, and there was no corroborative evidence of clandestine production and removal. Therefore, the allegation of clandestine clearance was not established, and the demand was set aside.

                            2. Shortage of Sponge Iron and Disallowance of Cenvat Credit:
                            The second issue pertains to the alleged shortage of Sponge Iron, leading to the disallowance of Cenvat credit of Rs. 5,37,600/-. The appellant argued that the physical verification was done based on eye estimation without actual weighment, and there was no discrepancy in the stock of finished goods. The Tribunal noted that the stock-taking was done on a mutually accepted manner without dispute at the spot, but the affidavits filed by the appellant indicated that the verification was not properly conducted. The Tribunal concluded that the allegation of shortage was based on suspicion and presumption without corroborative evidence, and thus, the denial of Cenvat credit was set aside.

                            3. Confirmation of Penalty:
                            The confirmation of penalty on the appellants was also challenged. Given that the allegations of clandestine clearance and shortage of Sponge Iron were not substantiated with credible evidence, the basis for imposing penalties was invalid. The Tribunal, referencing the ruling in Andaman Timber Industries, emphasized that the denial of cross-examination violated principles of natural justice, rendering the order nullity. Consequently, the penalties were also set aside.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals filed by the appellants, and granted consequential benefits in accordance with law. The judgment underscored the necessity of credible evidence and adherence to principles of natural justice, particularly the right to cross-examine witnesses whose statements form the basis of allegations.
                            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