<?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>Clandestine Removal of goods</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7150</link>
    <description>Shortages found by sampling-based stock verification do not by themselves establish clandestine removal; sampling and averaging methods produce normal variance, and a timely, plausible explanation (for example, raw material charged into production but not recorded) must be independently verified. Absent corroborative evidence beyond apparent numerical shortage, departmental demands and penalties based solely on discrepancies are not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2016 19:35:53 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2016 19:35:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Clandestine Removal of goods</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7150</link>
      <description>Shortages found by sampling-based stock verification do not by themselves establish clandestine removal; sampling and averaging methods produce normal variance, and a timely, plausible explanation (for example, raw material charged into production but not recorded) must be independently verified. Absent corroborative evidence beyond apparent numerical shortage, departmental demands and penalties based solely on discrepancies are not justified.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2016 19:35:53 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=7150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>