<?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>2010 (6) TMI 854 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193302</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings. The court emphasized the need for expert opinion on the handwriting in the notebook to ascertain the validity of the charges concerning the clandestine removal of ingots. The impugned order was set aside, and the adjudicating authority was directed to obtain the handwriting expert report before making a fresh decision, ensuring the assessees have a fair opportunity to present their defense.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Jul 2017 12:40:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 854 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193302</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings. The court emphasized the need for expert opinion on the handwriting in the notebook to ascertain the validity of the charges concerning the clandestine removal of ingots. The impugned order was set aside, and the adjudicating authority was directed to obtain the handwriting expert report before making a fresh decision, ensuring the assessees have a fair opportunity to present their defense.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193302</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>