<?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>2001 (8) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50796</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed against duty demand and penalty imposed for alleged clandestine processing and removal of man-made fabrics. The Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside as the evidence, primarily based on entries in a diary and register without corroboration, did not conclusively prove the clandestine activities. The Tribunal found the Dyeing Master&#039;s statements inadmissible as they were recorded without the appellants&#039; opportunity to cross-examine him. Lack of concrete evidence linking the diary entries to evasion led to ruling in favor of the appellants, citing precedents where similar charges were not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 16:15:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89275" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 200 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50796</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed against duty demand and penalty imposed for alleged clandestine processing and removal of man-made fabrics. The Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside as the evidence, primarily based on entries in a diary and register without corroboration, did not conclusively prove the clandestine activities. The Tribunal found the Dyeing Master&#039;s statements inadmissible as they were recorded without the appellants&#039; opportunity to cross-examine him. Lack of concrete evidence linking the diary entries to evasion led to ruling in favor of the appellants, citing precedents where similar charges were not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>