<?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 (7) TMI 592 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120237</link>
    <description>Unretracted admission of clandestine clearance, supported by unexplained shortage and unaccounted finished fabrics, was sufficient to sustain the finding of clandestine removal even without proof of identifiable buyers. The explanation that the goods were awaiting folding and packing was rejected as an afterthought. Confiscation and liability were therefore upheld on merits, while the penalties and redemption fine were reduced as excessive in the circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 592 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120237</link>
      <description>Unretracted admission of clandestine clearance, supported by unexplained shortage and unaccounted finished fabrics, was sufficient to sustain the finding of clandestine removal even without proof of identifiable buyers. The explanation that the goods were awaiting folding and packing was rejected as an afterthought. Confiscation and liability were therefore upheld on merits, while the penalties and redemption fine were reduced as excessive in the circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>