<?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 (11) TMI 825 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350946</link>
    <description>Alleged clandestine removal of cement could not be sustained on private gate registers and loose sheets showing clinker consumption alone, because the documents were not properly proved and lacked seizure memo, panchnama, or reliable recovery evidence. The Department also failed to produce independent corroboration such as excess raw material purchases, abnormal electricity use, excess packing material, transport evidence, identified buyers, or proof of unaccounted sale proceeds. As the buyers denied off-invoice purchases and the burden in clandestine removal matters rests heavily on the Department, the duty demand and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 07:02:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 825 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350946</link>
      <description>Alleged clandestine removal of cement could not be sustained on private gate registers and loose sheets showing clinker consumption alone, because the documents were not properly proved and lacked seizure memo, panchnama, or reliable recovery evidence. The Department also failed to produce independent corroboration such as excess raw material purchases, abnormal electricity use, excess packing material, transport evidence, identified buyers, or proof of unaccounted sale proceeds. As the buyers denied off-invoice purchases and the burden in clandestine removal matters rests heavily on the Department, the duty demand and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>