<?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>2012 (5) TMI 528 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245959</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, finding in favor of the appellant due to doubts regarding the stock discrepancies and the absence of concrete evidence of clandestine removal. The decision highlighted the importance of considering various factors in cases involving stock shortages and emphasized the need for substantial proof before confirming duty demands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2014 14:52:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352000" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 528 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245959</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, finding in favor of the appellant due to doubts regarding the stock discrepancies and the absence of concrete evidence of clandestine removal. The decision highlighted the importance of considering various factors in cases involving stock shortages and emphasized the need for substantial proof before confirming duty demands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>