<?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>2014 (11) TMI 75 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252758</link>
    <description>Clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods were alleged on the basis of notebooks recovered during search operations recording cash transactions, stock, production and deliveries. The defence challenged the reliability of those entries for lack of corroboration through excess stock, raw-material evidence, transporter investigations, electricity consumption and cross-examination of statement-makers, and also sought CENVAT credit and a claimed excise exemption. Supplier confirmations supported the notebook entries, while the explanations offered for them were found unconvincing. The evidentiary record was treated as sufficient without mathematical precision, and the duty demand was sustained with rejection of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367952" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 75 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252758</link>
      <description>Clandestine manufacture and clearance of excisable goods were alleged on the basis of notebooks recovered during search operations recording cash transactions, stock, production and deliveries. The defence challenged the reliability of those entries for lack of corroboration through excess stock, raw-material evidence, transporter investigations, electricity consumption and cross-examination of statement-makers, and also sought CENVAT credit and a claimed excise exemption. Supplier confirmations supported the notebook entries, while the explanations offered for them were found unconvincing. The evidentiary record was treated as sufficient without mathematical precision, and the duty demand was sustained with rejection of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>