<?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>2008 (10) TMI 184 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33901</link>
    <description>Non-accountal of finished goods and raw materials was treated as a serious breach of the obligation to maintain proper stock records, and Rule 10A of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was held attracted on the basis of substantial unrecorded quantities found during inspection. The explanation for the excess stock was found unconvincing, so confiscation was warranted and upheld. Mitigating circumstances were nevertheless noted, leading to reduction of the redemption fine and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 184 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33901</link>
      <description>Non-accountal of finished goods and raw materials was treated as a serious breach of the obligation to maintain proper stock records, and Rule 10A of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was held attracted on the basis of substantial unrecorded quantities found during inspection. The explanation for the excess stock was found unconvincing, so confiscation was warranted and upheld. Mitigating circumstances were nevertheless noted, leading to reduction of the redemption fine and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33901</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>