<?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>1999 (1) TMI 156 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91310</link>
    <description>Reliability of private notebook entries was central to a departmental duty-demand appeal concerning alleged post-clearance removals of fabrics. Entries in the &quot;Vandana&quot; notebook corresponded in part with the RG1 register, creating suspicion, but recovery of the notebook from the factory did not conclusively establish that the assessee maintained it. Discrepancies with other records, uncertainty over ownership and authorship, and the absence of corroborating evidence undermined the proposed demand. The explanation regarding fabric quantities was not refuted. The Tribunal therefore sustained the finding that post-clearance duty, confiscation and penalty could not be confirmed on insufficient evidence, and dismissed the departmental appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:32:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128372" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (1) TMI 156 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91310</link>
      <description>Reliability of private notebook entries was central to a departmental duty-demand appeal concerning alleged post-clearance removals of fabrics. Entries in the &quot;Vandana&quot; notebook corresponded in part with the RG1 register, creating suspicion, but recovery of the notebook from the factory did not conclusively establish that the assessee maintained it. Discrepancies with other records, uncertainty over ownership and authorship, and the absence of corroborating evidence undermined the proposed demand. The explanation regarding fabric quantities was not refuted. The Tribunal therefore sustained the finding that post-clearance duty, confiscation and penalty could not be confirmed on insufficient evidence, and dismissed the departmental appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>