<?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>2019 (6) TMI 1316 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382239</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, M/s M. M. Industries Pvt. Limited, in a duty evasion case. The Revenue&#039;s allegations were primarily based on illegible hand-written pencil ledgers, later computerized for clarity. The Tribunal found key flaws in the Revenue&#039;s case, including lack of clear evidence, retracted statements of individuals, and absence of corroborative evidence. No discrepancies were found during physical inspections at the appellant&#039;s premises, and legal procedures like cross-examination were not properly conducted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, granting consequential benefits to the appellants due to the lack of substantial evidence supporting the duty evasion allegations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:57:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=576867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 1316 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382239</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, M/s M. M. Industries Pvt. Limited, in a duty evasion case. The Revenue&#039;s allegations were primarily based on illegible hand-written pencil ledgers, later computerized for clarity. The Tribunal found key flaws in the Revenue&#039;s case, including lack of clear evidence, retracted statements of individuals, and absence of corroborative evidence. No discrepancies were found during physical inspections at the appellant&#039;s premises, and legal procedures like cross-examination were not properly conducted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, granting consequential benefits to the appellants due to the lack of substantial evidence supporting the duty evasion allegations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>