TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court upholds Tribunal decision on excise duty evasion, citing evidence and procedural lapses</h1> <h3>JAI SHREE AGRO IND. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., DELHI-V</h3> JAI SHREE AGRO IND. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., DELHI-V - 2008 (224) E.L.T. 63 (P & H) Issues:Appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenging a consolidated order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi regarding clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty.Analysis:The High Court Punjab & Haryana considered two appeals filed by the Company and the Director under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeals challenged a consolidated order passed by the Tribunal, which found that the appellants had cleared finished excisable goods without paying duty. The Tribunal based its decision on admissions made by the Company's Manager under Section 14 of the Act, admissions by the Director, and other documentary evidence. It was noted that the details of Outgoing Gate Passes (OGPs) and duty paid invoices did not match, and invoices produced against OGPs were not accepted due to non-compliance with procedural requirements as per Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal relied on a judgment of the Supreme Court in a relevant case. The High Court also mentioned that a previous appeal by another party had been dismissed by a Division Bench, upholding the same consolidated order. Therefore, the High Court found no merit in the current appeals and dismissed them.In conclusion, the High Court Punjab & Haryana dismissed the appeals after considering the evidence, admissions, procedural requirements, and relevant legal precedents. The decision was based on the findings of the Tribunal, including discrepancies in documents, non-compliance with rules, and previous dismissal of a similar appeal. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the clearance of excisable goods without payment of duty.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
