<?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>2000 (9) TMI 779 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99217</link>
    <description>Failure to maintain proper production records, by itself, was insufficient to sustain denial of small-scale exemption or an adverse inference that clearances had crossed the exemption limit. Collateral material such as sales tax returns and other department records could be used to determine the value of clearances, and on the available evidence there was no proof of clandestine manufacture, suppressed production, or clearance beyond the threshold. The duty demand was therefore not sustainable. The seizure was nevertheless upheld because of the record-keeping lapse, but the redemption fine and personal penalty were reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:06:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 779 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99217</link>
      <description>Failure to maintain proper production records, by itself, was insufficient to sustain denial of small-scale exemption or an adverse inference that clearances had crossed the exemption limit. Collateral material such as sales tax returns and other department records could be used to determine the value of clearances, and on the available evidence there was no proof of clandestine manufacture, suppressed production, or clearance beyond the threshold. The duty demand was therefore not sustainable. The seizure was nevertheless upheld because of the record-keeping lapse, but the redemption fine and personal penalty were reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>