<?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>Incorrect Application of Evidence Act Section 31 in Clandestine Manufacturing Case; Burden of Proof Lies with Department.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57573</link>
    <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal - Section 31 of Evidence Act has been wrongly applied. - Law is settled that burden of proof for alleged clandestine removal of goods by appellant is upon the department. Section 31 and 58 of Indian Evidence Act are held not applicable to the given facts and circumstances. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:32:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:32:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=641683" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Incorrect Application of Evidence Act Section 31 in Clandestine Manufacturing Case; Burden of Proof Lies with Department.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57573</link>
      <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal - Section 31 of Evidence Act has been wrongly applied. - Law is settled that burden of proof for alleged clandestine removal of goods by appellant is upon the department. Section 31 and 58 of Indian Evidence Act are held not applicable to the given facts and circumstances. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:32:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>