<?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 (6) TMI 399 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121932</link>
    <description>A claim for excise set-off under Notification No. 355/86-C.E. based on higher consumption of cut tobacco must be supported by credible records or other evidence. The assessee failed to prove actual consumption of 816 gms. for manufacture of 1,000 cigarettes, and earlier factual observations from a set-aside remand order could not be relied on. On the available record, the higher set-off claim remained unsubstantiated, so the additional benefit was denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:54:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158924" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (6) TMI 399 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121932</link>
      <description>A claim for excise set-off under Notification No. 355/86-C.E. based on higher consumption of cut tobacco must be supported by credible records or other evidence. The assessee failed to prove actual consumption of 816 gms. for manufacture of 1,000 cigarettes, and earlier factual observations from a set-aside remand order could not be relied on. On the available record, the higher set-off claim remained unsubstantiated, so the additional benefit was denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121932</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>