<?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>2005 (9) TMI 384 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116545</link>
    <description>Confiscation of allegedly excess factory goods was found unsustainable where the excess was worked out only on verification and estimated calculation, without actual weighment of the large stock. The verification chart and panchnama did not provide a reliable factual basis, particularly because the goods were of different sizes and the quantity involved was substantial. On that material, the confiscation was not justified and the order setting it aside was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:46:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153543" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 384 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116545</link>
      <description>Confiscation of allegedly excess factory goods was found unsustainable where the excess was worked out only on verification and estimated calculation, without actual weighment of the large stock. The verification chart and panchnama did not provide a reliable factual basis, particularly because the goods were of different sizes and the quantity involved was substantial. On that material, the confiscation was not justified and the order setting it aside was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116545</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>