<?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>2023 (10) TMI 1301 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445078</link>
    <description>CESTAT New Delhi dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding CENVAT credit recovery with interest and penalty. The case involved second-stage dealers allegedly issuing invoices without actual goods supply. The tribunal held that statements from five individuals became irrelevant and inadmissible as proper cross-examination procedures under section 9D were not followed, violating natural justice principles. Despite intelligence reports indicating non-existent entities in the supply chain, the tribunal ruled that thorough investigation following prescribed procedures was required. Without admissible evidence after excluding the statements, the original order favoring the assessee was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2023 09:54:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=730788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 1301 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445078</link>
      <description>CESTAT New Delhi dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal regarding CENVAT credit recovery with interest and penalty. The case involved second-stage dealers allegedly issuing invoices without actual goods supply. The tribunal held that statements from five individuals became irrelevant and inadmissible as proper cross-examination procedures under section 9D were not followed, violating natural justice principles. Despite intelligence reports indicating non-existent entities in the supply chain, the tribunal ruled that thorough investigation following prescribed procedures was required. Without admissible evidence after excluding the statements, the original order favoring the assessee was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445078</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>