<?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>2018 (8) TMI 791 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365319</link>
    <description>The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI regarding the demand of Central Excise Duty on M/s Maa Banjari Ispat Ltd. for clandestine removal of MS ingots and penalty on the director, Shri Dilip Agarwal, was successful. The tribunal found the evidence based on diary entries and third-party statements lacking in corroborative evidence to establish clandestine removal conclusively. Relying solely on third-party records was deemed insufficient, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and the revocation of the penalty imposed on Shri Dilip Agarwal. The judgment underscored the necessity of substantial evidence in such cases for a fair legal process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2018 07:07:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530794" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 791 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365319</link>
      <description>The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI regarding the demand of Central Excise Duty on M/s Maa Banjari Ispat Ltd. for clandestine removal of MS ingots and penalty on the director, Shri Dilip Agarwal, was successful. The tribunal found the evidence based on diary entries and third-party statements lacking in corroborative evidence to establish clandestine removal conclusively. Relying solely on third-party records was deemed insufficient, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and the revocation of the penalty imposed on Shri Dilip Agarwal. The judgment underscored the necessity of substantial evidence in such cases for a fair legal process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>