<?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 (7) TMI 160 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345048</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal of laminated fabrics may be established through seized notebooks, chits, transport records, job-work registers, cash details, corroborative statements, and surrounding circumstances. Duty demands based on clearances through a dummy concern, job-work operations, dealings involving processed fabric, and stock shortages were substantially sustained where the evidence supported undisclosed manufacture and clearance. Quantification of the demand required correction to exclude overlapping clearances and prevent duplication. Penalty could not be imposed on persons whose transactions appeared in books and bank records without proof that they handled dutiable goods or knowingly participated in evasion; penalties against those noticees were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2017 08:25:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=479787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 160 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345048</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal of laminated fabrics may be established through seized notebooks, chits, transport records, job-work registers, cash details, corroborative statements, and surrounding circumstances. Duty demands based on clearances through a dummy concern, job-work operations, dealings involving processed fabric, and stock shortages were substantially sustained where the evidence supported undisclosed manufacture and clearance. Quantification of the demand required correction to exclude overlapping clearances and prevent duplication. Penalty could not be imposed on persons whose transactions appeared in books and bank records without proof that they handled dutiable goods or knowingly participated in evasion; penalties against those noticees were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>