<?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>2007 (3) TMI 463 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121221</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the confiscation of 9.978 MT of PMSS and 12 MT of waste and scrap was dismissed. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision was upheld as the confiscation was found to be unwarranted due to genuine variations falling within the tolerance limit. The determination of stock based on an &quot;average&quot; method for both items did not justify penalty imposition. The judgment emphasized the significance of adhering to prescribed tolerance limits and recognizing genuine variations in stock quantification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:49:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 463 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121221</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the confiscation of 9.978 MT of PMSS and 12 MT of waste and scrap was dismissed. The Commissioner (Appeals) decision was upheld as the confiscation was found to be unwarranted due to genuine variations falling within the tolerance limit. The determination of stock based on an &quot;average&quot; method for both items did not justify penalty imposition. The judgment emphasized the significance of adhering to prescribed tolerance limits and recognizing genuine variations in stock quantification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>