<?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 478 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332217</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit demand and penalties cannot be sustained where the department relies mainly on witness statements that were not tested by cross-examination and produces no independent corroboration that inputs were not received. Here, the assessee had maintained statutory records, filed returns, and cleared finished goods on duty payment, while the departmental case rested on uncorroborated investigation statements and presumption rather than proof. In the absence of evidence establishing diversion or non-receipt of raw materials, the adjudication was untenable. The order-in-original was set aside and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:58:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440869" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 478 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332217</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit demand and penalties cannot be sustained where the department relies mainly on witness statements that were not tested by cross-examination and produces no independent corroboration that inputs were not received. Here, the assessee had maintained statutory records, filed returns, and cleared finished goods on duty payment, while the departmental case rested on uncorroborated investigation statements and presumption rather than proof. In the absence of evidence establishing diversion or non-receipt of raw materials, the adjudication was untenable. The order-in-original was set aside and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>