<?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>2010 (5) TMI 444 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202038</link>
    <description>The Member (T) allowed the department&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order and reinstating the original authority&#039;s decision. The discrepancies found at the respondent&#039;s factory premises, including shortage of finished goods and failure to maintain statutory records, supported the duty demand and penalties imposed. Despite objections raised by the respondent, the Member considered the reliability of private records, such as those maintained by the security in-charge, in confirming the duty demand and penalties. The appeal favored the department based on the findings of discrepancies and the credibility of private records.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 18:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 444 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202038</link>
      <description>The Member (T) allowed the department&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order and reinstating the original authority&#039;s decision. The discrepancies found at the respondent&#039;s factory premises, including shortage of finished goods and failure to maintain statutory records, supported the duty demand and penalties imposed. Despite objections raised by the respondent, the Member considered the reliability of private records, such as those maintained by the security in-charge, in confirming the duty demand and penalties. The appeal favored the department based on the findings of discrepancies and the credibility of private records.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>