<?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>1998 (8) TMI 208 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89345</link>
    <description>A demand alleging clandestine removal of calcium carbide failed where the record, including statutory returns, raw-material records, electricity-consumption material, and the absence of seizure or transport evidence, did not provide corroboration of suppressed production. Buyer-owned drums supplied for packing were also held not includible in assessable value because the material did not establish dummy concerns or that the assessee treated the drums as its own stock, and the packing exclusion principle applied. The order was set aside, duty was left for recomputation on those findings, and no penalty could survive on the disallowed heads.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:50:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126407" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 208 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89345</link>
      <description>A demand alleging clandestine removal of calcium carbide failed where the record, including statutory returns, raw-material records, electricity-consumption material, and the absence of seizure or transport evidence, did not provide corroboration of suppressed production. Buyer-owned drums supplied for packing were also held not includible in assessable value because the material did not establish dummy concerns or that the assessee treated the drums as its own stock, and the packing exclusion principle applied. The order was set aside, duty was left for recomputation on those findings, and no penalty could survive on the disallowed heads.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>