<?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 (5) TMI 463 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76386</link>
    <description>Incidental veneer cuttings and trimmings cleared as waste wood were not excisable under Chapter Heading 4404.90 because saleability alone does not satisfy the test of manufacture and excisable goods; the duty demand on waste wood was therefore set aside. Duty on shortages of finished goods and raw materials found during stock verification was upheld because the discrepancies were not satisfactorily explained. Penalty under Section 11AC was not sustained once the waste-wood demand failed and, for the shortages, the record indicated improper accounting rather than clandestine removal, leading only to a limited rule-based penalty. Employee penalties were also set aside for lack of adequate findings on role or knowledge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114599" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 463 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76386</link>
      <description>Incidental veneer cuttings and trimmings cleared as waste wood were not excisable under Chapter Heading 4404.90 because saleability alone does not satisfy the test of manufacture and excisable goods; the duty demand on waste wood was therefore set aside. Duty on shortages of finished goods and raw materials found during stock verification was upheld because the discrepancies were not satisfactorily explained. Penalty under Section 11AC was not sustained once the waste-wood demand failed and, for the shortages, the record indicated improper accounting rather than clandestine removal, leading only to a limited rule-based penalty. Employee penalties were also set aside for lack of adequate findings on role or knowledge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76386</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>