<?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>2007 (1) TMI 559 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172705</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the Department failed to prove unaccounted production or non-duty paid removal of PTY. The Tribunal found the assessment based on a retracted statement not to be perverse and upheld the dismissal of the appeal. The duty demands and penalties imposed by the adjudicator were set aside due to the absence of evidence establishing unaccounted production or non-duty paid removal, with the period for imposing duty being barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2017 11:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 559 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172705</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the Department failed to prove unaccounted production or non-duty paid removal of PTY. The Tribunal found the assessment based on a retracted statement not to be perverse and upheld the dismissal of the appeal. The duty demands and penalties imposed by the adjudicator were set aside due to the absence of evidence establishing unaccounted production or non-duty paid removal, with the period for imposing duty being barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>