<?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 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112767</link>
    <description>Shortages in duty-paid inputs were not excused on the basis of alleged flood loss because no reliable evidence from meteorological authorities or other corroboration of heavy flooding or related damage was produced. In the absence of credible proof supporting the explanation, the duty demand was held payable and the penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 57U(1)(4) was upheld against the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 16:50:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149783" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112767</link>
      <description>Shortages in duty-paid inputs were not excused on the basis of alleged flood loss because no reliable evidence from meteorological authorities or other corroboration of heavy flooding or related damage was produced. In the absence of credible proof supporting the explanation, the duty demand was held payable and the penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 57U(1)(4) was upheld against the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>