<?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 (9) TMI 288 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92465</link>
    <description>Duty liability on unaccounted V.P. Sugar found in the factory was sustained because the factual finding of non-accounting had no material challenge, and the amount already furnished under bond was appropriated towards duty. Confiscation and redemption fine were set aside because confiscation presupposes availability of the goods for seizure and redemption, which was absent. The penalty was reduced on the facts. The appeal succeeded only to that limited extent, while the duty-related finding remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2011 17:35:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 288 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92465</link>
      <description>Duty liability on unaccounted V.P. Sugar found in the factory was sustained because the factual finding of non-accounting had no material challenge, and the amount already furnished under bond was appropriated towards duty. Confiscation and redemption fine were set aside because confiscation presupposes availability of the goods for seizure and redemption, which was absent. The penalty was reduced on the facts. The appeal succeeded only to that limited extent, while the duty-related finding remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92465</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>