<?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 (10) TMI 3 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348848</link>
    <description>Common control, shared facilities and operational interdependence between two units were treated as indicators that the clearances were artificially split to remain within the exemption threshold, so clubbing of clearances and denial of exemption under Notification No. 1/93 were upheld. Seizure of unaccounted goods from an undeclared godown and factory premises, together with recovery of kaccha challans and absence of proper stock records, was treated as sufficient corroboration for clandestine removal without duty payment, and the duty demand was sustained. The commentary states that independent manufacture was not established on these facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:29:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=491102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 3 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348848</link>
      <description>Common control, shared facilities and operational interdependence between two units were treated as indicators that the clearances were artificially split to remain within the exemption threshold, so clubbing of clearances and denial of exemption under Notification No. 1/93 were upheld. Seizure of unaccounted goods from an undeclared godown and factory premises, together with recovery of kaccha challans and absence of proper stock records, was treated as sufficient corroboration for clandestine removal without duty payment, and the duty demand was sustained. The commentary states that independent manufacture was not established on these facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>