<?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>2003 (2) TMI 304 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107468</link>
    <description>Finished-goods shortage was treated as established where balance-sheet entries conflicted with statutory records and the authorised signatory admitted the discrepancy. The assessee&#039;s explanation regarding breakage or defective goods did not displace that finding. Limitation could not bar the demand without reliable evidence that complete shortage information had been timely disclosed to the Department. Penalty under Section 11AC remained applicable for the period covered by that provision, while penalty under Rule 173Q was sustained absent cogent grounds for deletion. The appellate order was set aside, with only a reduced quantum of Section 11AC penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:54:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 304 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107468</link>
      <description>Finished-goods shortage was treated as established where balance-sheet entries conflicted with statutory records and the authorised signatory admitted the discrepancy. The assessee&#039;s explanation regarding breakage or defective goods did not displace that finding. Limitation could not bar the demand without reliable evidence that complete shortage information had been timely disclosed to the Department. Penalty under Section 11AC remained applicable for the period covered by that provision, while penalty under Rule 173Q was sustained absent cogent grounds for deletion. The appellate order was set aside, with only a reduced quantum of Section 11AC penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107468</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>