<?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>2026 (1) TMI 153 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784397</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether central excise duty could be demanded solely on the basis of undisclosed income detected in an income-tax survey under s.133 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that undisclosed income found by the Income Tax Department cannot, without independent excise investigation, be presumed to represent consideration from clandestine manufacture or clearance; the burden lies on the Revenue to establish by evidence that such income pertained to the assessee&#039;s manufacturing unit and resulted in dutiable removals. As no investigation or corroborative material was produced linking the income to excisable production/clearances, the duty demand failed and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2026 08:04:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=875910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 153 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784397</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether central excise duty could be demanded solely on the basis of undisclosed income detected in an income-tax survey under s.133 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal held that undisclosed income found by the Income Tax Department cannot, without independent excise investigation, be presumed to represent consideration from clandestine manufacture or clearance; the burden lies on the Revenue to establish by evidence that such income pertained to the assessee&#039;s manufacturing unit and resulted in dutiable removals. As no investigation or corroborative material was produced linking the income to excisable production/clearances, the duty demand failed and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>