<?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 (6) TMI 160 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50989</link>
    <description>Clandestine removal of excisable goods cannot be sustained on private notebooks and a retracted statement alone without independent corroboration such as raw material movement, power use, labour deployment, customer-wise removals or sale proceeds. The note also states that duty demand for alleged clearance of dutiable goods as exempted goods fails where invoices, bank realisations and return filings support payment of duty and proper routing. On valuation, sales through a marketing concern do not establish undervaluation unless mutuality of interest or a related-person relationship is proved with cogent evidence. Clubbing of unit clearances for SSI exemption likewise requires proof of sham fragmentation or dummy units, not mere allegation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:42:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 160 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50989</link>
      <description>Clandestine removal of excisable goods cannot be sustained on private notebooks and a retracted statement alone without independent corroboration such as raw material movement, power use, labour deployment, customer-wise removals or sale proceeds. The note also states that duty demand for alleged clearance of dutiable goods as exempted goods fails where invoices, bank realisations and return filings support payment of duty and proper routing. On valuation, sales through a marketing concern do not establish undervaluation unless mutuality of interest or a related-person relationship is proved with cogent evidence. Clubbing of unit clearances for SSI exemption likewise requires proof of sham fragmentation or dummy units, not mere allegation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>