<?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 (5) TMI 1116 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185927</link>
    <description>Recovered commercial invoices and a minor raw-material shortage were insufficient to establish clandestine removal where the invoices were plausibly linked to post-clearance documentation for returned rejected goods. The tribunal noted that the Revenue did not undertake further investigation to identify buyers or transporters, trace the source of raw material, or obtain corroborating statements from production personnel. A charge of clandestine removal must be supported by independent and corroborative evidence, and not by recovered invoices alone. The allegation was therefore not proved, and the duty demand and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 14:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439931" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 1116 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185927</link>
      <description>Recovered commercial invoices and a minor raw-material shortage were insufficient to establish clandestine removal where the invoices were plausibly linked to post-clearance documentation for returned rejected goods. The tribunal noted that the Revenue did not undertake further investigation to identify buyers or transporters, trace the source of raw material, or obtain corroborating statements from production personnel. A charge of clandestine removal must be supported by independent and corroborative evidence, and not by recovered invoices alone. The allegation was therefore not proved, and the duty demand and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>