<?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 (9) TMI 742 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367006</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order due to insufficient evidence caused by the non-supply of relied upon documents, failure to allow cross-examination of witnesses, and lack of concrete proof of clandestine removal of goods. The decision emphasized the necessity of following legal procedures and evidentiary rules for fair adjudication, leading to the overturning of the initial order imposing interest and penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2019 16:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 742 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367006</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order due to insufficient evidence caused by the non-supply of relied upon documents, failure to allow cross-examination of witnesses, and lack of concrete proof of clandestine removal of goods. The decision emphasized the necessity of following legal procedures and evidentiary rules for fair adjudication, leading to the overturning of the initial order imposing interest and penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367006</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>