https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93149 Conditional permission for sending sub-assemblies to a neighbouring concern was not shown to have been complied with, because the goods were neither brought back nor cleared on payment of duty, so the duty demand was sustained. The plea of denial of natural justice failed, as inspection of documents had been allowed and no specific request for cross-examination was shown to have been refused. The defence that the goods had been sent by another sister concern also failed for want of supporting gate passes, clearance records, or a statement from that concern. Confiscation and penalty were upheld because the contravention was established, but the redemption fine was reduced as excessive. en-us Fri, 30 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:13:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93149 Conditional permission for sending sub-assemblies to a neighbouring concern was not shown to have been complied with, because the goods were neither brought back nor cleared on payment of duty, so the duty demand was sustained. The plea of denial of natural justice failed, as inspection of documents had been allowed and no specific request for cross-examination was shown to have been refused. The defence that the goods had been sent by another sister concern also failed for want of supporting gate passes, clearance records, or a statement from that concern. Confiscation and penalty were upheld because the contravention was established, but the redemption fine was reduced as excessive. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93149