<?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 (5) TMI 211 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91167</link>
    <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal of LPG cylinders was not proved where the demand for duty and penalty rested mainly on barrier entries, untested witness statements, and alleged raw material procurement. The barrier records were not conclusive of actual transport, the statements were not subjected to cross-examination, and one key statement was considered doubtful because of personal hostility. The Department also failed to produce convincing evidence of raw material receipt matching the alleged production scale. On that evidentiary record, the allegation was found insufficient and the demand and penalty were held unsustainable in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:17:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128229" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (5) TMI 211 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91167</link>
      <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal of LPG cylinders was not proved where the demand for duty and penalty rested mainly on barrier entries, untested witness statements, and alleged raw material procurement. The barrier records were not conclusive of actual transport, the statements were not subjected to cross-examination, and one key statement was considered doubtful because of personal hostility. The Department also failed to produce convincing evidence of raw material receipt matching the alleged production scale. On that evidentiary record, the allegation was found insufficient and the demand and penalty were held unsustainable in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>