<?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>2006 (12) TMI 396 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121097</link>
    <description>The appeal was filed by M/s. Jai Beverages Pvt. Ltd. against the confiscation of goods and imposition of personal penalties. The appellant argued that duty was paid on the goods found excess in the factory, stored separately due to space constraints in the duty paid godown. The Tribunal found that the goods were duty paid and the excess quantity in the factory matched the shortage in the duty paid stock. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:37:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158091" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 396 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121097</link>
      <description>The appeal was filed by M/s. Jai Beverages Pvt. Ltd. against the confiscation of goods and imposition of personal penalties. The appellant argued that duty was paid on the goods found excess in the factory, stored separately due to space constraints in the duty paid godown. The Tribunal found that the goods were duty paid and the excess quantity in the factory matched the shortage in the duty paid stock. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>