<?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>2015 (12) TMI 1638 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190358</link>
    <description>Allegations of clandestine removal, undervaluation and wrong classification failed because the evidence did not conclusively establish that the goods were precipitated calcium carbonate, and the check-post data, buyer records, ledgers and blank GRs lacked independent corroboration. The duty demands were therefore set aside. Denial of small scale industry exemption also failed, as the record showed operation under the exemption regime, no fresh material justified turnover aggregation, and no input credit had been availed. Once the substantive demands failed, confiscation could not stand, and the redemption fine and penalties were also set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458476" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1638 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190358</link>
      <description>Allegations of clandestine removal, undervaluation and wrong classification failed because the evidence did not conclusively establish that the goods were precipitated calcium carbonate, and the check-post data, buyer records, ledgers and blank GRs lacked independent corroboration. The duty demands were therefore set aside. Denial of small scale industry exemption also failed, as the record showed operation under the exemption regime, no fresh material justified turnover aggregation, and no input credit had been availed. Once the substantive demands failed, confiscation could not stand, and the redemption fine and penalties were also set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>