<?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>1962 (3) TMI 75 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151814</link>
    <description>A fiscal finding of short-accounting or improper maintenance of excise records cannot stand when it rests only on speculative assumptions and inferential calculations unsupported by tangible evidence. The Court rejected the conclusions based on a test run, estimated mixed juice, assumed recovery rates, and presumed uniform milling performance, holding that the alleged shortfall was not independently proved. As the same unreliable calculations underpinned the alleged defects in the registers, the finding of improper account maintenance also failed. The excise demand and penalty founded on those findings were quashed, with refund directed if payment had been made.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168852" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (3) TMI 75 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151814</link>
      <description>A fiscal finding of short-accounting or improper maintenance of excise records cannot stand when it rests only on speculative assumptions and inferential calculations unsupported by tangible evidence. The Court rejected the conclusions based on a test run, estimated mixed juice, assumed recovery rates, and presumed uniform milling performance, holding that the alleged shortfall was not independently proved. As the same unreliable calculations underpinned the alleged defects in the registers, the finding of improper account maintenance also failed. The excise demand and penalty founded on those findings were quashed, with refund directed if payment had been made.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151814</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>