<?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>2024 (1) TMI 448 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448049</link>
    <description>CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal concerning alleged clandestine removal of steel ingots worth over Rs. 50 crores. The tribunal found that crucial documents relied upon in the show cause notice were not provided to the appellant, violating natural justice principles. Despite 20 years since the notice issuance, the department failed to produce corroborative evidence for quantification of alleged shortages and clearances. The tribunal held that clandestine manufacturing allegations require substantial evidence beyond recorded statements, which were retracted. Additionally, the show cause notice issued on 27/07/2004 was time-barred, as it came nearly three years after the September 2001 official visit, exceeding the prescribed limitation period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739610" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 448 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448049</link>
      <description>CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal concerning alleged clandestine removal of steel ingots worth over Rs. 50 crores. The tribunal found that crucial documents relied upon in the show cause notice were not provided to the appellant, violating natural justice principles. Despite 20 years since the notice issuance, the department failed to produce corroborative evidence for quantification of alleged shortages and clearances. The tribunal held that clandestine manufacturing allegations require substantial evidence beyond recorded statements, which were retracted. Additionally, the show cause notice issued on 27/07/2004 was time-barred, as it came nearly three years after the September 2001 official visit, exceeding the prescribed limitation period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>