<?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 (12) TMI 13 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389130</link>
    <description>Allegations of clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods must be supported by concrete evidence linking raw material procurement, labour, power use, manufacture, transport and financial flows. On the facts recorded, the work orders and surrounding materials indicated a composite fabrication, supply and erection contract performed substantially at site, with large structures made there under project arrangements. The Department did not establish the actual quantity or value of goods manufactured in the factory or job-worker premises, and the director&#039;s statement, without documentary corroboration, was insufficient to sustain the entire demand. The duty demand was therefore held unsustainable, and the related penalties also failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2019 12:23:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=595938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 13 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389130</link>
      <description>Allegations of clandestine manufacture and removal of excisable goods must be supported by concrete evidence linking raw material procurement, labour, power use, manufacture, transport and financial flows. On the facts recorded, the work orders and surrounding materials indicated a composite fabrication, supply and erection contract performed substantially at site, with large structures made there under project arrangements. The Department did not establish the actual quantity or value of goods manufactured in the factory or job-worker premises, and the director&#039;s statement, without documentary corroboration, was insufficient to sustain the entire demand. The duty demand was therefore held unsustainable, and the related penalties also failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>