<?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>2009 (6) TMI 165 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75059</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal was found where goods were cleared without excise invoices, without entry in statutory records, and without duty payment; the duty demand was therefore confirmed. Debits made in PLA and Cenvat accounts could not be ignored merely on the plea of unauthorized employee action where the company&#039;s records and conduct showed adoption of the entries, but duplicative duty for the same liability could not be sustained. Personal penalty was attracted against the manager responsible for excise compliance despite non-handling of goods, and interest followed on the confirmed duty, with the penalty reduced in view of the role of another employee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 165 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75059</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal was found where goods were cleared without excise invoices, without entry in statutory records, and without duty payment; the duty demand was therefore confirmed. Debits made in PLA and Cenvat accounts could not be ignored merely on the plea of unauthorized employee action where the company&#039;s records and conduct showed adoption of the entries, but duplicative duty for the same liability could not be sustained. Personal penalty was attracted against the manager responsible for excise compliance despite non-handling of goods, and interest followed on the confirmed duty, with the penalty reduced in view of the role of another employee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>