<?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>2016 (6) TMI 867 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329158</link>
    <description>Duty demand quantified on the basis of VAT returns and other available records was held sustainable where the assessee had manufactured and cleared dutiable goods without payment of duty and failed to maintain separate records for exempted and dutiable clearances. The use of a best judgment method did not make the demand conjectural, because the authority relied on actual material on record and derived a near-correct sales figure for the period where complete production and clearance data were unavailable. The assessee&#039;s cited cases were distinguished on the ground that the department had used statutory records to quantify clearances, so the challenge to the quantification method failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:25:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432632" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 867 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329158</link>
      <description>Duty demand quantified on the basis of VAT returns and other available records was held sustainable where the assessee had manufactured and cleared dutiable goods without payment of duty and failed to maintain separate records for exempted and dutiable clearances. The use of a best judgment method did not make the demand conjectural, because the authority relied on actual material on record and derived a near-correct sales figure for the period where complete production and clearance data were unavailable. The assessee&#039;s cited cases were distinguished on the ground that the department had used statutory records to quantify clearances, so the challenge to the quantification method failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>