<?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>2017 (2) TMI 192 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338492</link>
    <description>Contemporaneous statutory records, D-3 intimations, re-warehousing certificates, job-work records, panchanama and Excise Inspector verifications supported the assessee&#039;s claim that the goods were received, used in manufacture and exported. The Court held that a finding of diversion based mainly on oral statements could not override this documentary trail, so the duty demand, interest and penalty on the assessee were unsustainable. Once the duty demand failed, the consequential penalty on the director also could not survive, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge to reduction of penalty likewise failed. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the assessee succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 11:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457598" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 192 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338492</link>
      <description>Contemporaneous statutory records, D-3 intimations, re-warehousing certificates, job-work records, panchanama and Excise Inspector verifications supported the assessee&#039;s claim that the goods were received, used in manufacture and exported. The Court held that a finding of diversion based mainly on oral statements could not override this documentary trail, so the duty demand, interest and penalty on the assessee were unsustainable. Once the duty demand failed, the consequential penalty on the director also could not survive, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge to reduction of penalty likewise failed. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the assessee succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>