<?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 (7) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92146</link>
    <description>Reliance on a transporter&#039;s statement without producing the witness for effective cross-examination violated natural justice, so the duty demand could not be sustained on the existing record. The record also failed to establish proper document-wise linkage between the goods receipts and the assessee, requiring fresh verification before any liability could be fastened. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:21:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (7) TMI 208 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92146</link>
      <description>Reliance on a transporter&#039;s statement without producing the witness for effective cross-examination violated natural justice, so the duty demand could not be sustained on the existing record. The record also failed to establish proper document-wise linkage between the goods receipts and the assessee, requiring fresh verification before any liability could be fastened. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>