<?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 (3) TMI 839 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340336</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal and duty evasion may be established through a consistent chain of circumstantial and external evidence where primary records are suppressed or destroyed. The Tribunal accepted weighbridge slips, invoices, bank trail, broker statements, buyer statements, and transport records as corroborative material showing a structured scheme involving brokers, bill traders, transporters, and buyers. It held that direct evidence is not indispensable in such cases and that the department may prove the charge on a preponderance of probability. The duty demand and penalties were upheld, and the appeals failed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:32:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 839 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340336</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal and duty evasion may be established through a consistent chain of circumstantial and external evidence where primary records are suppressed or destroyed. The Tribunal accepted weighbridge slips, invoices, bank trail, broker statements, buyer statements, and transport records as corroborative material showing a structured scheme involving brokers, bill traders, transporters, and buyers. It held that direct evidence is not indispensable in such cases and that the department may prove the charge on a preponderance of probability. The duty demand and penalties were upheld, and the appeals failed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>