<?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 (12) TMI 666 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352397</link>
    <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief, as the demand was deemed unsustainable due to lack of corroborative evidence supporting the allegation of clandestine removal of goods. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of substantial proof beyond mere shortages detected during stock verification to establish such allegations. The judgment was pronounced on 11.12.2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2017 13:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 666 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352397</link>
      <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief, as the demand was deemed unsustainable due to lack of corroborative evidence supporting the allegation of clandestine removal of goods. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of substantial proof beyond mere shortages detected during stock verification to establish such allegations. The judgment was pronounced on 11.12.2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>