<?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>2022 (5) TMI 646 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422386</link>
    <description>A charge of clandestine removal, carrying serious civil consequences, must be proved by tangible and corroborative evidence. Third-party transport records and retracted statements, without reliable proof of excess raw material procurement, abnormal electricity use, actual removal, identified buyers, receipt of sale proceeds, or interception of goods, were insufficient. The officers&#039; statements were treated as inadmissible for non-compliance with the governing statutory requirement, and the absence of meaningful consignee verification and failure to join transporters as noticees further weakened the case. The demand was therefore not sustainable in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 May 2022 21:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679110" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 646 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422386</link>
      <description>A charge of clandestine removal, carrying serious civil consequences, must be proved by tangible and corroborative evidence. Third-party transport records and retracted statements, without reliable proof of excess raw material procurement, abnormal electricity use, actual removal, identified buyers, receipt of sale proceeds, or interception of goods, were insufficient. The officers&#039; statements were treated as inadmissible for non-compliance with the governing statutory requirement, and the absence of meaningful consignee verification and failure to join transporters as noticees further weakened the case. The demand was therefore not sustainable in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422386</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>