<?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 (11) TMI 354 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334336</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision on the verification method of stock and condonation for shortage, ruling against the appellant on both issues. The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims, leading the court to uphold the adverse inference drawn by the authorities. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 354 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334336</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision on the verification method of stock and condonation for shortage, ruling against the appellant on both issues. The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims, leading the court to uphold the adverse inference drawn by the authorities. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit, affirming the Tribunal&#039;s judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>