<?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 (4) TMI 516 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121859</link>
    <description>Allegations of clandestine manufacture or removal must be supported by credible evidence; projected production figures alone are insufficient to sustain a fiscal adjudication. Where the Revenue relies only on estimates furnished to the electricity board and produces no material proving unaccounted production or clearance, the burden of proof is not discharged. The adjudication was therefore unsustainable, and the appellate relief quashing it remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:28:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158851" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 516 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121859</link>
      <description>Allegations of clandestine manufacture or removal must be supported by credible evidence; projected production figures alone are insufficient to sustain a fiscal adjudication. Where the Revenue relies only on estimates furnished to the electricity board and produces no material proving unaccounted production or clearance, the burden of proof is not discharged. The adjudication was therefore unsustainable, and the appellate relief quashing it remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>