<?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 (9) TMI 995 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175484</link>
    <description>A Tribunal&#039;s final finding that the products were not shown to have been sold in retail will not be disturbed in appeal unless the finding is shown to be perverse or otherwise legally infirm. The Supreme Court held that the revenue failed to produce material demonstrating any perversity in the Tribunal&#039;s factual determination, so no interference was warranted. The challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s fact-finding therefore failed, and the assessee&#039;s position was confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 995 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175484</link>
      <description>A Tribunal&#039;s final finding that the products were not shown to have been sold in retail will not be disturbed in appeal unless the finding is shown to be perverse or otherwise legally infirm. The Supreme Court held that the revenue failed to produce material demonstrating any perversity in the Tribunal&#039;s factual determination, so no interference was warranted. The challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s fact-finding therefore failed, and the assessee&#039;s position was confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>