<?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 (2) TMI 227 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91355</link>
    <description>Normal wholesale price to independent buyers governed valuation under Central Excise section 4 where sales to a connected buyer were shown at a lower price without satisfactory commercial justification. The demand for clandestine removal was sustained because the record showed a fictitious intermediary, unretreated admissions of undervaluation and removal without proper accounting, and no credible rebuttal from the assessee; the penalty was upheld on the same material. The objections based on natural justice and jurisdiction failed because notice and opportunities were given, the ex parte disposal was not shown to be unfair, and the adjudicating authority was found competent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:02:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128417" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (2) TMI 227 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91355</link>
      <description>Normal wholesale price to independent buyers governed valuation under Central Excise section 4 where sales to a connected buyer were shown at a lower price without satisfactory commercial justification. The demand for clandestine removal was sustained because the record showed a fictitious intermediary, unretreated admissions of undervaluation and removal without proper accounting, and no credible rebuttal from the assessee; the penalty was upheld on the same material. The objections based on natural justice and jurisdiction failed because notice and opportunities were given, the ex parte disposal was not shown to be unfair, and the adjudicating authority was found competent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>