<?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 (6) TMI 1296 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793915</link>
    <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal of steel ingots and CTD bars could not be proved merely from excess power consumption and related papers. The technical consumption norm was rejected because it lacked trial production, supporting scientific data, proper furnace-wise comparison, and reliable calculations; the assessee&#039;s contrary technical evidence was also not properly considered. The corroborative invoices, loose slips, dealer statements and recovered materials were weakened by retractions, cross-examination, absence of the dealers before the authority, and no dependable proof of unaccounted procurement, clandestine clearance or receipt of sale proceeds. The Tribunal was therefore right to hold that revenue had not established evasion by reliable evidence, and the duty demand and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:07:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1296 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793915</link>
      <description>Clandestine manufacture and removal of steel ingots and CTD bars could not be proved merely from excess power consumption and related papers. The technical consumption norm was rejected because it lacked trial production, supporting scientific data, proper furnace-wise comparison, and reliable calculations; the assessee&#039;s contrary technical evidence was also not properly considered. The corroborative invoices, loose slips, dealer statements and recovered materials were weakened by retractions, cross-examination, absence of the dealers before the authority, and no dependable proof of unaccounted procurement, clandestine clearance or receipt of sale proceeds. The Tribunal was therefore right to hold that revenue had not established evasion by reliable evidence, and the duty demand and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793915</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>