<?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 (5) TMI 449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208032</link>
    <description>The shortage of primary gold was challenged on the ground that the stock verification did not account for the 9% wastage permissible on export of studded jewellery under the notification. The record showed imports, exports, gold recovered from dust, gold in stock, and findings and mountings in stock, but it did not demonstrate that the allowable wastage had been considered in computing the alleged shortage. The adjudicating authority was therefore required to re-examine the demand in light of the notification conditions and the assessee&#039;s relied-upon case law, after giving a hearing. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181505" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208032</link>
      <description>The shortage of primary gold was challenged on the ground that the stock verification did not account for the 9% wastage permissible on export of studded jewellery under the notification. The record showed imports, exports, gold recovered from dust, gold in stock, and findings and mountings in stock, but it did not demonstrate that the allowable wastage had been considered in computing the alleged shortage. The adjudicating authority was therefore required to re-examine the demand in light of the notification conditions and the assessee&#039;s relied-upon case law, after giving a hearing. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>