<?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 (5) TMI 142 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342404</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal cannot be established merely from paper slips and a retracted statement where the record lacks independent corroboration. The alleged manufacture and clearance were not supported by buyer verification, further investigation, or other positive evidence, so the evidentiary basis was found insufficient. On that footing, the allegation of clandestine removal failed and the order dropping the proceedings was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 142 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342404</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal cannot be established merely from paper slips and a retracted statement where the record lacks independent corroboration. The alleged manufacture and clearance were not supported by buyer verification, further investigation, or other positive evidence, so the evidentiary basis was found insufficient. On that footing, the allegation of clandestine removal failed and the order dropping the proceedings was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342404</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>