<?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>2011 (7) TMI 188 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205243</link>
    <description>Finished PV Shirting was treated as liable to confiscation where the statutory RG-I stock register did not reflect the goods at the time of inspection and the entry was altered immediately after the visit. Rule 53 required proper accountal of manufactured goods, and Rule 173Q(1)(b) attached confiscation and penalty to non-accountal of finished goods. The production slips and the Section 14 statement supported the finding that the original entry had been changed to conceal unaccounted production. Even if some wrapped goods were excluded from finished-goods treatment, substantial unaccounted stock still remained, so the contrary finding of no excess stock and no breach of Rule 53 was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 188 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205243</link>
      <description>Finished PV Shirting was treated as liable to confiscation where the statutory RG-I stock register did not reflect the goods at the time of inspection and the entry was altered immediately after the visit. Rule 53 required proper accountal of manufactured goods, and Rule 173Q(1)(b) attached confiscation and penalty to non-accountal of finished goods. The production slips and the Section 14 statement supported the finding that the original entry had been changed to conceal unaccounted production. Even if some wrapped goods were excluded from finished-goods treatment, substantial unaccounted stock still remained, so the contrary finding of no excess stock and no breach of Rule 53 was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>