<?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 (9) TMI 427 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332166</link>
    <description>A second show cause notice on the same shortage allegation could not be sustained absent fresh incriminating material, so the earlier notice continued to stand and the extended period was not justified on that basis. Adjudication by a Commissioner of a notice answerable to an Assistant Commissioner was not treated as jurisdictionally defective because the excise rules allowed a senior officer to exercise the powers of a subordinate officer. Penalty for alleged shortage of duty-paid Alumina was set aside because the mid-year stock verification was not a reliable basis for penal action in the circumstances, and the shortage issue was left for fresh examination by the adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 10:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440749" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 427 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332166</link>
      <description>A second show cause notice on the same shortage allegation could not be sustained absent fresh incriminating material, so the earlier notice continued to stand and the extended period was not justified on that basis. Adjudication by a Commissioner of a notice answerable to an Assistant Commissioner was not treated as jurisdictionally defective because the excise rules allowed a senior officer to exercise the powers of a subordinate officer. Penalty for alleged shortage of duty-paid Alumina was set aside because the mid-year stock verification was not a reliable basis for penal action in the circumstances, and the shortage issue was left for fresh examination by the adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>