<?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>2025 (7) TMI 357 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774289</link>
    <description>CESTAT Chandigarh ruled on jurisdiction of Central Excise Officers to issue SCN for customs duty recovery from 100% EOU. The tribunal held that Central Excise authorities have jurisdiction over EOUs under their administrative control to issue show cause notices demanding customs/excise duties, citing government notifications and circulars. However, the tribunal found the department failed to establish a case for SCN issuance, noting absence of authentic documents like Bill of Entry and lack of evidence for alleged clandestine removal. All demands and penalties were set aside except duty on deemed exports to two specific entities, which was remanded for fresh consideration. Appeal allowed in part.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 08:42:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 357 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774289</link>
      <description>CESTAT Chandigarh ruled on jurisdiction of Central Excise Officers to issue SCN for customs duty recovery from 100% EOU. The tribunal held that Central Excise authorities have jurisdiction over EOUs under their administrative control to issue show cause notices demanding customs/excise duties, citing government notifications and circulars. However, the tribunal found the department failed to establish a case for SCN issuance, noting absence of authentic documents like Bill of Entry and lack of evidence for alleged clandestine removal. All demands and penalties were set aside except duty on deemed exports to two specific entities, which was remanded for fresh consideration. Appeal allowed in part.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>