<?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>Audit Finding Does Not Prove Intentional Suppression of Duty Liability by Appellant; No Automatic Inference of Fact Suppression.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=46336</link>
    <description>It cannot be said that only because audit party had found some credit availed as inadmissible, suppression of fact is made out. Further it is not established that appellant had any malafide intention to suppress its duty liability from the department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 08:11:35 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 08:11:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Audit Finding Does Not Prove Intentional Suppression of Duty Liability by Appellant; No Automatic Inference of Fact Suppression.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=46336</link>
      <description>It cannot be said that only because audit party had found some credit availed as inadmissible, suppression of fact is made out. Further it is not established that appellant had any malafide intention to suppress its duty liability from the department.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 08:11:35 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=46336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>