<?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>1993 (12) TMI 123 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82942</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, upheld the adjudicating authority&#039;s orders in two appeals concerning alleged excesses and shortages of TV sets during stock verification at the appellant&#039;s factory. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s explanations for the discrepancies unsatisfactory, noting a lack of documentary evidence and failure to substantiate claims. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s failure to maintain proper stock and accounts, leading to the imposition of duties, fines, and penalties. The Vice President&#039;s concurrence highlighted that provisional release of goods did not absolve the appellant from their liabilities, resulting in the dismissal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 12:53:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (12) TMI 123 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82942</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, upheld the adjudicating authority&#039;s orders in two appeals concerning alleged excesses and shortages of TV sets during stock verification at the appellant&#039;s factory. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s explanations for the discrepancies unsatisfactory, noting a lack of documentary evidence and failure to substantiate claims. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s failure to maintain proper stock and accounts, leading to the imposition of duties, fines, and penalties. The Vice President&#039;s concurrence highlighted that provisional release of goods did not absolve the appellant from their liabilities, resulting in the dismissal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>